Average Incomes

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his most recent estimate is of the average income per person in Coventry, South.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	 Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 25 May 2006:
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about average income per person in the Coventry South constituency. I am replying in her absence. (73463)
	The ONS published estimates of household income for regions and local areas of the UK on 9 May 2006. Coventry South is within the NUTS(1) 3 area of Coventry. This is the most detailed level of geography for which estimates are produced.
	Table A contains estimates of total incomes per head and Gross Disposable Household Income (GDHI) per head for Coventry.
	(1) Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics
	
		
			  Table A: Coventry NUTS3 
			  £ per head( 1) 
			   Total income( 2)  GDHI( 3) 
			 1995 11,118 7,318 
			 1996 11,467 7,615 
			 1997 12,113 8,099 
			 1998 12,868 8,370 
			 1999 13,447 8,789 
			 2000 14,401 9,348 
			 2001 15,106 9,897 
			 2002 15,428 10,145 
			 2003 16,004 10,515 
			 2004 16,790 10,847 
			 (1) Population measure is based upon mid-year estimate for total population (2 )All household income including employers' social contributions, imputed social contributions, social benefits and other current transfers received.  (3 )Gross disposable household income (GDHI) is the amount of money that households have available for spending or saving after deductions and expenditure associated with income, eg taxes and social contributions, and provision for future pension income.

European Union

Graham Brady: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the  (a) net contribution to the EU budget,  (b) net contribution to the EU institutions and  (c) net expenditure transfers (i) were from in each year from 2001-02 to 2005-06 and (ii) are forecast to be from 2007-08 to 2012-13; and what assessment he has made of how each would change should (A) Romania and (B) Bulgaria's accession to the EU be delayed for a year.

Edward Balls: The UK net contributions to the EC budget and net payments to EC institutions for the period 2001-02 to 2007-08 are presented in Table 3.2 of the European community finances white paper (Cm 6770) published on 24 May 2006. Net expenditure transfers over this period are in Table 1.1 of the public expenditure statistical analyses (Cm 6811) published on 15 May 2006. 2007-08 is the final year of the current public expenditure planning cycle and forecasts beyond this period will be included in the comprehensive spending review 2007. For estimated net contributions to the EC budget over the next financial perspective I refer the hon. Member to the reply to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove) on 31 January 2005,  Official Report, column 399W.
	The Government have not produced estimates for the financial implications of delaying the accession of Romania and Bulgaria.

Insurance Mediation

John McDonnell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what representations he has received on the impact of the EU directive on insurance mediation on small and medium-sized  (a) enterprises traders and  (b) freight forwarders in the UK;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the impact of the implementation of the EU directive on insurance mediation on small and medium-sized enterprises traders and freight forwarders in the UK.

Edward Balls: The financial services authority (FSA) assumed responsibility for the regulation of general insurance on 14 January 2005. The FSA's regime served to implement the EU's insurance mediation directive in the UK.
	The FSA will begin a review of the effectiveness of the general insurance regime in April 2006. This will include seeking feedback from firms and consumer research.
	The impact of the IMD implementation on the UK's freight forwarding sector has been the subject of discussions between the British international freight association (BIFA) and HM Treasury. The Government are confident that the UK has correctly translated the IMD into UK legislation. The impact of the IMD implementation on the UK's freight forwarding sector has been the subject of discussions between the British international freight association (BIFA) and HM Treasury. The Government are confident that the UK has correctly translated the IMD into UK legislation.

Gamebirds

Anne Snelgrove: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many commercial hatcheries are listed in the Great Britain Poultry Register in respect of each species.

Ben Bradshaw: The information requested is set out in the following table:
	
		
			  Species  Number of premises that hatch birds 
			 Chicken 271 
			 Turkey 54 
			 Ducks 173 
			 Geese 92 
			 Other 603 
			 Unknown 2 
			 Total number of premises registered as being a commercial hatchery 649 
		
	
	This information was produced using data from the Great Britain Poultry Register taken on 12 May 2006. All data are subject to change.
	The GB Poultry Register allows people to register themselves as a commercial hatchery without necessarily indicating which species they hatch hence the unknown category. It is also possible that premises may have registered themselves as having an incubator capacity but have not registered that they use this for commercial purposes.
	The GB Poultry Register captures data under the Avian Influenza (Preventive Measures) (No2) Regulations 2005. Registration is mandatory for premises with 50 or more birds kept for commercial purposes. In addition, the Register also includes voluntary registrations for non-commercial premises and those where fewer than 50 poultry are kept.
	The completeness of the data is dependant on the level of compliance with the legislation as specified above. Owners are required to de-register if they no longer keep poultry.
	Only the major poultry hatchery species i.e. chicken, turkey, duck, goose, have been listed. All other species have grouped in the 'Other' category.
	Two premises in the GB Poultry Register had registered as a commercial hatchery. However, they indicated in a free text field that they did not hatch anything. These premises were removed from this report.

Perfluorooctane Sulphonate

Michael Penning: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what advice and guidance  (a) the Department,  (b) the Environment Agency,  (c) the Government's Advisory Committee on Hazardous Substances and  (d) the Drinking Water Inspectorate has issued on the use of perfluorooctane sulphonate.

Ian Pearson: DEFRA, and the Government's Advisory Committee on Hazardous Substances have not issued any guidance on the use of perflurooctane sulfonate. However, a European Commission proposal for a Directive (76/769/EC), relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of perfluorooctane sulfonates (PFOSs) is currently being negotiated. While the UK welcomes the proposals we do not feel that they go far enough, and the UK is now aiming to strengthen these proposals by working through a co-decision process at EU level.
	We have reached agreement with member countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on the hazard profile of PFOS see www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/18/2382880.pdf We are also working to have PFOS agreed as a persistent organic pollutant and subject to international controls under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the UNECE Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants. This is a longer term aim.
	The Environment Agency has not issued advice or guidance on the use of PFOS. It has however requested that it be phased out on the basis of its toxicty to the environment and humans.
	While the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) has not issued specific advice or guidance on the use of PFOS, it has provided advice to organisations involved in the response to the Buncefield fire on the regulation of PFOS in drinking water. A value of three microgrammes per litre was provided by the DWI to the Three Valleys water company as reflecting the best available evidence on which the water company can base its judgment of wholesomeness and safety, and the actions, if any, that it may need to take to safeguard drinking water quality going forward.
	The current national advice provided by the Health Protection Agency is that it appears unlikely that a lifetime's consumption of drinking-water containing concentrations of up to three micrograms of PFOs per litre would harm human health.

Pheasants

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many pheasants have been imported from France in each of the last 10 years; whether bird imports are still permitted; and if she will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 27 March 2006
	The EU-wide system for recording the number of livestock imported into each member state, TRACES, does not differentiate between different types of game birds. Further, there are inconsistencies in the way that data can be inputted and interpreted so the available figures are not reliable. However, the database does show that, to date, no game birds have been imported into the UK from France in 2006.
	Representatives from the shooting industry in this country estimate that around three million pheasants are imported every year into the UK.
	If avian influenza was confirmed or even strongly suspected in wild birds or poultry, then trade in live birds from the affected zone would stop.

Water Charges

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the  (a) standing charges,  (b) cost per litre and  (c) other charges levied by each water company in England and Wales are to individual households (i) with and (ii) without water meters.

Ian Pearson: The following tables summarise the charges that are levied by water companies on households both with and without water meters.
	
		
			  Unmeasured bills 2006-07 
			   Fixed Charge £/year water  Rateable value charge p/£RV water  Average bill 2006-07 £ water  Fixed Charge £/year sewerage  Rateable value charge p/£RV sewerage  Average bill 2006-07 £ sewerage 
			  Water and sewerage companies   
			 Anglian — — 165.00 126.38 44.40 204.00 
			 Anglian 104.82 40.77 — — — — 
			 Hartlepool 108.84 — — — — — 
			 Dwr Cymru 99.95 56.83 162.00 124.62 75.81 211.00 
			
			  Northumbrian (incl. Essex and Suffolk)   
			 Northumbrian 63.60 38.37 120.00 89.40 42.68 153.00 
			 Essex and Suffolk 36.25 — 167.00 — — — 
			 Essex — 53.48 — — — — 
			 Suffolk — 94.53 — — — — 
			 Severn Trent — — 140.00 — — 133.00 
			 Zone 1 — 81.08 — — 75.52 — 
			 Zone 2 — 73.00 — — 63.60 — 
			 Zone 3 — 70.78 — — 67.00 — 
			 Zone 4 — 73.96 — — 72.65 — 
			 Zone 5 — 85.02 — — 74.77 — 
			 Zone 6 — 88.44 — — 82.10  
			 Zone 7 — 89.02 — — 80.01 — 
			 Zone 8 — 70.78 — — 66.53 — 
			 South West 79.30 84.10 207.00 71.70 194.37 359.00 
			 Southern 27.76 45.00 115.00 52.89 84.00 216.00 
			 Thames 24.00 — 166.00 31.00 — 105.00 
			 Area 1 — 53.96 — — 28.96 — 
			 Area 2 — 54.93 — — 30.02 — 
			 Area 3 — 41.29 — — 18.85 — 
			 Area 4 — 49.44 — — 27.07 — 
			 Area 5 — 63.50 — — 35.48 — 
			 Area 6 — 55.08 — — 29.36 — 
			 Area 7 — 75.67 — — 41.26 — 
			 United Utilities 44.00 63.60 148.00 — 102.20 168.00 
			 Wessex 7.00 97.32 176.00 7.00 100.20 187.00 
			 Yorkshire — — 141.00 32.55 96.60 155.00 
			 Yorkshire 29.63 89.80 — — — — 
			 York 23.25 51.10 — — — — 
			
			  Water only companies   
			 Bournemouth and W Hampshire 21.00 57.19 142.00 — — — 
			 Bristol 21.00 65.10 139.00 — — — 
			 Cambridge 22.50 43.10 118.00 — — — 
			 Cholderton 33.00 62.39 174.00 — — — 
			 Dee Valley — — 127.00 — — — 
			 Chester 29.44 43.74 — — — — 
			 Wrexham 74.64 46.70  — — — 
			 Folkestone and Dover 40.00 87.30 182.00 — — — 
			 Mid Kent 49.00 60.68 163.00 — — — 
			 Portsmouth 19.00 — 80.00 — — — 
			 South East 12.00 28.70 168.00 — — — 
			 Eastbourne — 88.77 — — — — 
			 Mid-Southern — 51.37 — — — — 
			 Mid-Sussex — 94.48 — — — — 
			 West Kent — 82.73 — — — — 
			 South Staffordshire — 51.40 106.00 — — — 
			 Sutton and East Surrey — — 159.00 — — — 
			 Croydon 37.00 33.60 — — — — 
			 Northern area 137.80 — — — — — 
			 Southern area 37.00 57.48 — — — — 
			 Tendring Hundred 33.00 90.06 200.00 — — — 
			 Three Valleys (incl. North Surrey) — — 150.00 — — — 
			 Three Valleys 32.40 — — — — — 
			 Colne valley — 41.11 — — — — 
			 Lee valley — 50.49 — — — — 
			 Rickmansworth — 40.06 — — — — 
			 North Surrey 32.40 42.21 — — — — 
			  Note:  Bill = fixed charge + (rateable value charge x rateable value of property) 
		
	
	
		
			  Measured bills 2006-07 
			   Volumetric charge p/m( 3) *  Standing charge £/year water  Average bill 2006-07 £ water  Volumetric charge p/m( 3) * sewerage  Standing charge £/year sewerage  Average bill 2006-07 £ sewerage 
			  Water and sewerage companies   
			 Anglian — — 121.00 — — 156.00 
			 Anglian: Standard 106.46 24.00 — 106.58 62.00 — 
			 SoLow 138.46 0.00 — 189.25 0.00 — 
			 Aquacare Plus 58.46 60.00 — 50.58 104.00 — 
			 Hartlepool: Standard 74.41 24.00 — — — — 
			 SoLow 106.41 0.00 — — — — 
			 Aquacare Plus 43.75 47.00 — — — — 
			 Dwr Cymru 113.93 27.00 103.00 125.32 50.00 134.00 
			 Northumbrian (incl. Essex and Suffolk) — 26.40 — 76.47 60.00 134.00 
			 Northumbrian 78.95 — 104.00 — — — 
			 Essex and Suffolk — — 129.00 — — — 
			 Essex 87.95 — — — — — 
			 Suffolk 119.32 — — — — — 
			 Severn Trent 108.77 19.80 121.00 73.23 10.24 130.00 
			 South West 124.97 23.76 138.00 232.48 11.04 222.00 
			 Southern 76.00 24.57 108.00 119.70 43.95 170.00 
			 Thames 95.10 23.00 144.00 47.49 42.00 102.00 
			 United Utilities 112.60 25.00 135.00 91.40 71.00 157.00 
			 Wessex 128.76 17.00 132.00 124.26 34.00 144.00 
			 Yorkshire — — 120.00 101.37 32.55 128.00 
			 Yorkshire 102.00 24.05 — — — — 
			 York 57.10 21.21 — — —  
			
			  Water only companies   
			 Bournemouth and W Hampshire 87.57 21.00 121.00 — — — 
			 Bristol 93.45 29.00 125.00 — — — 
			 Cambridge 72.00 24.50 97.00 — — — 
			 Cholderton 103.00 23.00 149.00 — — — 
			 Dee Valley — 23.00 93.00 — — — 
			 Chester 73.91 — — — — — 
			 Wrexham 80.01 — — — — — 
			 Folkestone and Dover 112.68 25.56 152.00 — — — 
			 Mid Kent — — 132.00 — — — 
			 Standard 89.98 22.20 — — — — 
			 Low User 119.58 0.00 — — — — 
			 Helpu/medico 57.88 54.40 — — — — 
			 Portsmouth 53.10 23.00 82.00 — — — 
			 South East — 15.00 144.00 — — — 
			 Eastbourne 130.85 — — — — — 
			 Mid-Southern 74.41 — — — — — 
			 Mid-Sussex 136.74 — — — — — 
			 West Kent 109.29 — — — — — 
			 South Staffs 77.00 25.00 109.00 — — — 
			 Sutton and East Surrey — 23.00 114.00 — — — 
			 Northern Area 74.47 — — — — — 
			 Southern Area 96.52 — — — — — 
			 Tendring Hundred 148.13 23.40 149.00 — — — 
			 Three Valleys (incl. North Surrey) 80.60 24.80 134.00 — — — 
			 * Volumetric charges for water and sewerage are calculated per cubic metre, rather than on a per litre basis [one cubic metre = 1000 litres].

Drought Orders

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport 
	(1)  what discussions she has had with representatives of the tourism, hotel and conference industry in London and the South East on measures which could be taken to mitigate the effect on the industry if drought orders were to be introduced;
	(2)  assessment she has made of the likely impact of a drought order in the Thames Water region on the number of tourists coming through London and its airports;
	(3)  when she last met the Mayor of London to discuss the possible impact of drought orders on London's tourist, conference and hotel industries.

Shaun Woodward: VisitBritain and the UK tourism industry, including the Mayor of London who has responsibility for tourism in London, have strong and well rehearsed mechanisms in place for dealing with events which can impact on the visitor economy; my Department is closely involved in these arrangements.
	VisitBritain is consulting partners in London and the South East, such as the Tourism Alliance and Tourism South East, about the possible implications for the tourism industry of drought orders. The information and advice from this exercise will be discussed with the Secretary of State and myself as necessary. We see no need as yet for a meeting with the Mayor of London to discuss possible drought orders but will keep this, along with other potential actions, under review as circumstances demand.

Gambling Act

Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when the Gambling Commission will issue its guidance on compliance and enforcement responsibilities in respect of the Gambling Act 2005.

Richard Caborn: The Gambling Commission is aiming to consult in the next few weeks on its arrangements for licensing, compliance and enforcement under the Gambling Act 2005. It plans to publish its finalised guidance in the Autumn 2006. Copies of the published guidance will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Licensing Act

Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many new licences have been issued under the Licensing Act 2003; and how many licences were issued for (a) public houses,  (b) convenience stores and  (c) off licences in each of the previous five years in each licensing authority area.

Shaun Woodward: Statistics concerning new licences issued under the Licensing Act 2003 (the 2003 Act), which came into force on 24 November 2005, are not available. However, the Department estimates that some 190,000 premises have been licensed under the 2003 Act, the majority of which are for the sale of alcohol.
	Data for the number of new licences issued in England and Wales under the Licensing Act 1964, which has now been replaced by the 2003 Act, were collected every 3 years and are available for a 12 month period to the 30 June 2004 as detailed in the following table:
	
		
			   Total licences issued  Total public houses  Total off-licensed premises 
			 30 June 2001 6,482 3,072 2,057 
			 30 June 2004 7,717 3,485 2,800 
			  Source:  DCMS Statistical Bulletin: Liquor Licensing: England and Wales, July 2003-June 2004, Table 5. 
		
	
	Separate data for convenience stores are not available.

Licensing Act

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when her Department will publish its first review of the guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Shaun Woodward: The guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 is being reviewed in two stages. Following the initial review, which covers issues where a broad consensus exists among stakeholders, it is expected that supplementary guidance will be laid before Parliament in June 2006.
	In parallel with this, a full review is being conducted, including a formal public consultation. As a result of this process, we expect to lay a revised version of the Guidance before Parliament by the end of 2006.

London Olympics

Hugh Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the different inflation rates were which were applied by the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games, referred to in the Minister for Sports' letter of 17 May 2006 to the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent, when raising its budget from £1.5 billion to £2 billion.

Tessa Jowell: holding answer 22 May 2006
	The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG) budget reflects an average annual rate of inflation over the 7 year period from 2004 to 2011 of approximately 4 per cent.
	I am advised by LOCOG that they have used prudent but not excessive rates of inflation dependent upon the nature of the relevant costs. LOCOG has also taken into consideration the fact that the costs will be spent at different points in the lifecycle of the project.

Consumer Protection

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the operation of section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974; what recent representations he has received about the operation of this  (a) section and  (b) Act; and what amendments have been made to the Act.

Ian McCartney: Section 75 of the 1974 Consumer Credit Act has the effect that where a purchase for an amount over £100 and not more than £30,000 has been funded by a credit card, the purchaser will have the same rights in respect of a breach of contract or misrepresentation against the credit card company, as he would have against the supplier himself.
	One area of section 75 around which there has been a degree of uncertainty relates to overseas transactions (i.e. where a credit card is used to buy something abroad). The Office of Fair Trading sought to resolve this issue by way of a Court declaration. The case reached its conclusion on 22 March 2006, when the Court of Appeal ruled that section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does apply to overseas transactions, as well as to domestic ones.
	Before this ruling and during the passage of the Consumer Credit Bill (now the Consumer Credit Act 2006), Baroness Miller of Hendon tabled an amendment to try and clarify the issue of overseas application of section 75. The Government resisted Baroness Miller's amendment on the grounds that the issue was the subject of an ongoing case at the Court of Appeal, and that it would be inappropriate to amend section 75 before that case had reached its conclusion.
	The subsequent Court ruling of 22 March is, the Government believes, a good outcome for consumers and it has no plans at present to make changes to section 75 of the 1974 Act.
	More generally, as the 2006 Act is brought into force, it will make a number of significant changes to the 1974 Act. In particular:
	 (a) Improving consumer rights and redress:
	by replacing the extortionate credit test (in the 1974 Act) with a new, broader test concerned with the principle of 'unfairness';
	 (b) Improving the regulation of consumer credit businesses:
	by altering the powers of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to enable it to take targeted action to drive out rogues, and by requiring minimum standards of information provision to consumers throughout the life of the loan; and
	 (c) More appropriate regulation of consumer credit agreements:
	by abolishing the £25,000 limit for regulation and making the rules concerning enforceability consistent and proportionate.

Parcelforce

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proportion of Government funding announced on 18 May for the Royal Mail will be made available for Parcelforce activities; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Fitzpatrick: No proportion of these facilities have been set aside for Parcelforce.

Pensioner Debt

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the level of personal debt among pensioners; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what steps he is taking to ease the burden of debt experienced by pensioners; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  if he will introduce a scheme to relieve pensioners of personal debt; and if he will make a statement.

Ian McCartney: We are doing much to help those with personal debt problems as outlined in the Government's 2004 "Tackling Over-indebtedness: Action Plan" and the subsequent 2005 annual report. DTI examples include the recently launched £45 million Face-to-Face Debt Advice Project, that will result in hundreds of new debt advisers and the multi million pound support given to the National Debtline phone service. Such assistance is open to all and we much welcome the use of them by vulnerable pensioners.
	Overall, the Government's strategy for older people is focused on tackling poverty in old age. The measures include: pension credit which targets help to the poorest pensioners; the state second pension which will provide a more generous additional provision for people on low and moderate earnings; and one-off payments for eligible pensioners to help ensure financial security in retirement and reduce the risk of falling into problem debt.
	Priorities for the Government's strategy for older people in 2006-07 include maximizing take-up activity to ensure that those entitled to pension credit receive it and increasing take-up of the state second pension, including among carers and the long-term disabled, and the 200 winter fuel payments.

Post Office Branch Network

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the Government's long-term policy is on the Post Office branch network, with particular reference to rural areas.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Government are committed to supporting the rural post office network with annual social network payments of £150 million for the next two years. The level of any support beyond 2008 will depend, following public consultation, on decisions on the future of the post office network

Royal Mail

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of the rate of return the Government will receive on its loan to the Royal Mail.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The detail of the arrangements for the extension of the debt facilities have yet to be decided. The rate of return on the utilisation of the facilities will be set on a commercial basis.

Small Business Friendly Concordat

Edward Davey: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many local authorities have signed up to the Small Business Friendly Concordat; what steps are being taken by the Government to encourage local authorities to do so; and what target he has set for take up by local authorities of the Concordat.

Phil Woolas: I have been asked to reply.
	Records maintained by the Small Business Service (SBS) suggest that presently 63 local authorities in England have formally signed up to the Small Business Friendly Concordat (March 2004).
	The "National Procurement Strategy for Local Government" includes a milestone for all local authorities to have adopted the Concordat by the end of 2005. The Government recognises that small businesses can provide best value in procurement and that is why it is keen to continue encouraging adoption of the Concordat throughout local government.
	ODPM has written to local authorities on two occasions encouraging sign-up to the Concordat. In conjunction with key partners the ODPM is exploring further ways to promote the Concordat to local authorities.

Sunday Trading

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what his Department's expenditure has been on research into the  (a) economic and  (b) social implications of the easing or removing of Sunday trading restrictions.

Ian McCartney: DTI appointed Indepen Consulting Ltd to produce an economic cost benefit analysis of easing the restrictions on Sunday shopping. The cost was around £60,000. We published Indepen's report on 5 May on the DTI website:
	www.dti.gov.uk/consmners/buying-selling/Sunday%20Shopping.

Sunday Trading

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will organise and fund a conference to discuss the social costs and benefits of easing or removing Sunday trading restrictions.

Ian McCartney: There are no current plans to organise and fund a conference to discuss the social costs and benefits of easing or removing Sunday trading restrictions.
	From 13 January to 14 April, as part of the review of Sunday shop opening hours, we asked for views and evidence from consumers, religious groups, employees and businesses not only on the economic case, but on all aspects of extending Sunday shopping hours. We have received a large number of responses and are currently analysing them.
	On 5 May, we published an independent economic cost-benefit analysis, commissioned by DTI. On 10 May, DTI held a stakeholder conference where the independent consultants presented the cost benefit analysis and participants were able to discuss the assumptions and findings. This was followed by optional forums on specific themes; one of the themes was the impact on society of extended Sunday shopping hours. We intend to publish a report of this event on our website shortly.

Convicting Rapists and Protecting Victims (Consultation Paper)

Barbara Follett: To ask the Solicitor-General what responses he has received to his Department's consultation paper convicting rapists and protecting victims.

Mike O'Brien: The consultation period runs until 31 July 2006 and we normally expect responses towards the end of the period. Nonetheless I have already received three responses and the Office for Criminal Justice Reform has received six responses. Seven of these have come from individuals and two from organisations.

Serious Fraud Office

John Robertson: To ask the Solicitor-General what assessment he has made of the likely trends in the number of cases demanding the attention of the Serious Fraud Office over the next three years.

Mike O'Brien: Between 2001 and 2005 the SFO had 223 cases referred to it and it has so far accepted 82 of these cases. The remaining cases are mostly referred to other agencies.
	From 2001 to 2005 the SFO has seen a considerable increase in case referrals and it doesn't anticipate that this trend will change. Moreover the cases that the SFO sees are growing in complexity and are commonly linked to international financial markets.
	It is not possible to provide accurate data for the future as this depends on the number of frauds, their nature and their referral to the SFO.

Information Technology

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much was spent on information technology (IT) sourced from outside his Department in each of the last five years; who is responsible for such projects in his Department; and what IT  (a) expertise and  (b) qualifications they possess.

Peter Hain: The National Assembly of Wales provided information technology support service functions to the Wales Office until 31 March 2004, and the department of constitutional affairs (DCA) has provided these services since then. Accordingly the Assembly were responsible for sourcing and awarding any contracts up to March 2004 and the DCA has done so since then. In the last financial year the Wales Office spent £176,161.40 on IT services provided via DCA.
	Expenditure records before this time are not kept in this format, and this information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Small Change Big Difference

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps his Department has taken following the launch of the Government's 'small change big difference' campaign.

Peter Hain: Responsibility for delivering health policy in Wales has been devolved to the National Assembly for Wales. The Welsh Assembly Government have in place the 'health challenge Wales' campaign—a call to people and organisations to work together for a healthier nation. Further information is available on the Welsh Assembly Government's website at:
	http://new.wales.gov.uk

Small Change Big Difference

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps his Department has taken following the launch of the Government's Small Change Big Difference Campaign.

David Cairns: The statutory functions of the Scotland Office relate to constitutional matters arising from the devolution settlement for Scotland and the conduct of elections to the Scottish Parliament. The focus of the Small Change Big Difference campaign is the encouragement of healthier lifestyles which is primarily a devolved matter for the Scottish Executive to determine.

Information Technology

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much was spent on information technology (IT) sourced from outside his Department in each of the last five years; who is responsible for such projects in his Department; and what IT  (a) expertise and  (b) qualifications they possess.

Gareth Thomas: DFID's central records do not distinguish IT purchases, so provision of spending information for these purchases would incur disproportionate costs. DFID procurement conforms to guidance from the Office of Government Commerce, and purchases are approved by a number of officials with delegated authority. All major IT purchases are reviewed by the Head of Information Systems, who has a Mathematics degree and more than 25 years' experience of working in IT, including16 years in a managerial role.

Small Change Big Difference

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department and its agencies have taken following the launch of the Government's "Small Change Big Difference" campaign.

Gareth Thomas: DFID has embraced the "Small Change Big Difference" campaign in many ways by encouraging its staff to improve their future health and well-being by making small, easily achievable changes to their lifestyle. The Department supports these changes by ensuring that our staff restaurants offer nutritious food, using fresh produce and offering "healthy options" wherever possible.
	DFID encourages its staff to take control of their health and lives and to achieve a healthy work-life balance. The Department offers its staff flexible work patterns and provides a website that provides information and advice on how to deal with everyday issues such as bereavement, stress, nutrition, smoking and drinking.
	Our well-being centres offer gym facilities to encourage staff to improve their health and well-being through physical activity. We also have secure bicycle parking spaces for staff who cycle to work, with storage and shower facilities.
	As the programme of work develops, the Department of Health (DOH) will be working across all of Government to ensure the programme joins up to promote maximum impact. The DOH is leading the implementation for this initiative as part of its cross-government commitment to deliver the public health White Paper "Choosing Health".

Air Travel

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of changes in the demography of air passengers in the UK within the last 10 years; and if he will make a statement.

Gillian Merron: The last formal assessment undertaken was for the Air Transport White Paper in December 2003. The Department keeps these matters under review through regular surveys (eg CAA Airport Passenger Survey, British Social Attitudes Survey, International Passenger Survey and ONS Omnibus Survey).
	As part of the analysis leading up to Air Transport White Paper (ATWP), the Department carried out a formal assessment of the public "Attitudes to Air Travel", by population characteristics, using data from February 2002 ONS Omnibus Survey which can be found on the DfT Website.
	http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/qroups/dft_transstats/documents/page/dft_transstats_505963.hcsp
	Another supporting paper to the ATWP "Passenger Forecasts: Additional Analysis" reported differences between countries and regions within the UK in the propensity to fly ie the relationship between the number of passengers and the general population. This can be found on the DfT website.
	http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/qroups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_031861.pdf

Airbus A380

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  which Ministers were present for the arrival of the Airbus A380 at Heathrow Airport on 18 May;
	(2)  what departmental costs were incurred in transporting officials and Ministers to the arrival of the Airbus A380 at Heathrow Airport on 18 May.

Gillian Merron: The total cost incurred by the Department in transporting officials to the arrival of the Airbus A380 at Heathrow Airport on 18 May was 55. No Ministers from the Department were present, but my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer attended.

Aircraft Emissions

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the flights taken by Ministers in his Department since 2001; and what measures to offset the carbon emissions were taken for each flight.

Gillian Merron: Information about flights undertaken by Ministers in the Department for Transport on official business, since its formation on 29 May 2002 has been placed in the Libraries of the House.
	All ministerial travel is undertaken in accordance with the 'Ministerial Code' and 'Travel by Ministers', copies of which are available in the Library. Since 1999, the Government have published on an annual basis a list of all overseas visits by Cabinet Ministers costing in excess of £500. Copies of the lists are available in the Library. Information for 2005-06 is currently being compiled and will be published when it is ready.
	All central Government ministerial and official air travel is being offset from 1 April 2006. Departmental aviation emissions will be calculated on an annual basis and subsequently offset through payments to a central fund. The fund will purchase certified emissions reductions credits from energy efficiency and renewable energy projects with high sustainable development benefits, located in developing countries.
	Carbon dioxide emissions arising from 32 (Royal) Squadron flights are included in the Government's carbon offsetting commitment. Carbon emissions arising from the use of these flights will be recorded and offset in the same way as those for scheduled flights.

Buses

Graham Stringer: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action his Department is taking to ensure bus fares do not rise faster than the cost of motoring.

Gillian Merron: The Government are very concerned about the growing divergence between the cost of public transport and private motoring which is largely due to market forces. The rise in bus fares mostly reflects the increased costs of labour, fuel and insurance to bus operators. These costs need to be met either through fare increases or subsidy. The Department makes it clear in its dealings with the bus industry that affordable fares are a crucial factor in promoting patronage growth and accessibility of services.
	The Government provides support for local bus services in the form of Bus Service Operators Grant, worth over £370 million annually to the industry. This grant reduces operating costs and therefore helps to minimise fares.
	In addition, the Government have introduced free concessionary bus travel for over-60s and disabled people and made available an additional £350 million to local authorities to reimburse to operators the revenue foregone. As from 1 April 2008, holders of concessionary passes will be eligible for free local bus travel in any part of the country.
	We are working up arrangements to develop new ways in which local authorities and operators can plan bus networks together by mutual agreement and consistently with competition law. This could include agreement on bus fares and ticketing.

Calypso

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what safety deficiencies were identified when the Calypso was inspected at Tilbury in May; and why the ship was not detained at the docks on grounds of safety.

Stephen Ladyman: The passenger ship "The Calypso" was inspected in Tilbury under Port State Control on 5 May 2006. The ship was attended by Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) surveyors, London Port Health and a radio inspector. A full inspection and satisfactory safety drill was carried out. A total of 13 deficiencies were found and the nature of these deficiencies was not considered serious enough to warrant detention of the ship.

Departmental Bills (Amendments)

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the occasions when an amendment has been moved by  (a) a Labour back bencher,  (b) Opposition back bencher and  (c) Opposition front bench spokesman to a Bill sponsored by his Department which has been accepted by his Department during the 2005-06 Session; and if he will make a statement.

Gillian Merron: The Department for Transport has sponsored the following Bills during the current session Crossrail (Hybrid) Bill, Merchant Shipping Pollution Act [LORDS], Road Safety Bill [LORDS] and the Civil Aviation Bill. Information on amendments moved and accepted during the committee and report stages on these Bills is published in the  Official Report.

Departmental Funding (Halifax)

Linda Riordan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what funding for which his Department is responsible has been allocated to the Halifax constituency in the past 12 months.

Gillian Merron: The Department allocates funding to support local transport to Calderdale borough council and West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority/Executive, which both cover the constituency. The local transport capital funding allocations that the Department announced in December 2004 for 2005-06 is set out in the following table.
	
		
			  £ million 
			  Nature of funding  Calderdale  West Yorkshire PTA 
			 Highways capital maintenance 3.639 0 
			 Integrated transport improvements 2.337 8.442 
			 Total 5.976 8.442 
		
	
	West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive received in the past 12 months a Rural Bus Subsidy Grant of £1.019 million of which £139,518 has been spent on bus services in Calderdale.
	With regards funding for rail and trunk roads, it is not possible to allocate funding to a specific constituency.

Departmental Staff

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people in his Departmenthave been  (a) disciplined and  (b) dismissed for (i) inappropriate use of the internet while at work and (ii) using work telephones to access premium rate numbers in each of the last five years.

Gillian Merron: The Department for Transport was established in May 2002.
	
		
			  Number of people disciplined or dismissed for inappropriate use of the internet at work in the Department for Transport 
			   Disciplined  Dismissed 
			 2002 0 2 
			 2003 1 2 
			 2004 13 2 
			 2005 2 0 
			 2006 0 1 
		
	
	For using work telephones to access premium rate numbers one member of staff was disciplined in 2003, one in 2004 and one in 2005.
	Regular reminders are issued to staff about their responsibility to not misuse the telephone, e-mail and internet systems. In order to ensure that these are not abused, or that the Department's security is not compromised, telephone, e-mails and internet use may be monitored periodically.
	The Department's Staff Handbook establishes that staff must not make inappropriate use of official time including use of telephones and computer-related services. Such inappropriate use may constitute a disciplinary offence. There is also a separate policy on the use of the internet.
	Staff are encouraged to regularly review these items to ensure they are complying with their responsibilities.

Nuclear Rail Freight

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the  (a) safety and  (b) security of trains transporting nuclear material; and with whom responsibility lies for providing the risk assessment for such trains.

Stephen Ladyman: The information requested is as follows.
	 (a) The regulations for the safe transport of radioactive material require that periodic assessments of the radiological impact of the transport of radioactive material are carried out. This Department has carried out surveys which show that the radiation doses from the transport of radioactive material under both normal and abnormal conditions are low.
	The latest reports that include rail transport are: Survey into the Radiological Impact of the Normal Transport of Radioactive Material in the UK byRoad and Rail (NRPB-W66) and Radiological Consequences Resulting from Accidents and Incidents Involving the Transport of Radioactive Materials in the UK?2004 Review (HPA-RPD-007). Copies of these reports have been placed in the House Library and are also available on the internet at the following websites:
	http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/publications/w_series reports/2005/nrpb_w66.htm
	http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/publications/hpa_rpd_reports/2005/hpa_rpd_007.htm
	 (b) The security of nuclear transport is a matter for the Department of Trade and Industry. The transportation of spent nuclear fuel by rail is carried out in a secure manner and in accordance with stringent security regulations?the Nuclear Industries Security Regulations 2003. These regulations are administered and enforced by the Office for Civil Nuclear Security (OCNS), who regulate the security of such movements of spent nuclear fuel. The security of the transportation of civil nuclear material was thoroughly reviewed following the events of 11 September 2001, and is regularly reviewed in light of the prevailing threat. OCNS is satisfied that the measures in place to prevent theft or sabotage are adequately robust.
	Under health and safety legislation it is the responsibility of the organisation carrying out any activity to carry out a risk assessment. In the specific case of activities involving radioactive material this is a requirement of the Ionising Radiations Regulations 1999 (1999 No. 3232).

Officials' Travel Costs

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discounts are available in relation to hotel accommodation used by  (a) civil servants and  (b) special advisers in his Department.

Gillian Merron: The Department for Transport, Highways Agency, and Driving Standards Agency all use a centrally negotiated contract with Expotel, providing discounted rates for hotels throughout the UK. This is available to both civil servants and special advisers.
	The Vehicle Certification Agency uses a centrally negotiated contract, and has a discount arrangement with a hotel in Detroit.
	The Vehicle and Operator Services Agency has negotiated a preferential rate with Arnos Manor Hotel in Bristol, and MCA has similar arrangements with the Jury's Inn and Ibis West hotels in Southampton.
	The Government Car and Despatch Agency and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency currently have no discounted hotel rates in place.

School Transport

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  if he will encourage passenger transport executives  (a) to pilot and  (b) to develop the yellow bus system for school transport;
	(2)  what recent discussions he has had with  (a) passenger transport authorities,  (b) bus operators and  (c) local authorities on new ways of transporting children to school;
	(3)  what initiatives his Department has undertaken to encourage  (a) passenger transport executives and  (b) local authorities to develop innovative systems of transportation of school children; and what funding he has allocated for this purpose for 2006-07;
	(4)  what recent discussions he has had with local authorities on their plans to promote safer, more sustainable transport for school children;
	(5)  whether his Department has evaluated the pilots of the Yellow Bus system of transporting children to school.

Gillian Merron: The Department has set out our plans for promoting safer, more sustainable travel to school and our expectations of local authorities in Travelling to School: an action plan which we published jointly with the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) in September 2003.
	The Department wants children to walk or cycle to school but, where it is too far or it is considered not safe for them to do so, we want to see more children catching the bus.
	The Department is not planning a national roll out of dedicated school buses, but want to encourage individual local authorities and Passenger Transport Executives to consider school bus schemes as part of broader local transport planning and decide if they would be appropriate to their area. The Department knows from our earlier evaluation of various small-scale yellow and other dedicated school bus schemes that well-designed schemes have the potential to reduce car dependency for journeys to school and the traffic congestion that results from this. But care also needs to be taken to ensure that they are appropriate to local circumstances and do not reduce levels of walking or cycling or undermine the viability of important bus services available to the wider public.
	The Department is providing £18.7 million over the next three years to purchase 150 dedicated buses for West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive's MyBus school bus scheme. The evaluation of this scheme should be completed next year but the initial signs are that there has been some impact in reducing the number of children travelling to school by car and other non-transport benefits have also been reported.
	The Education and Inspections Bill includes provisions to improve home to school transport, including enabling a small number of local authorities to propose Pathfinder schemes to test innovative approaches to home to school transport. These schemes would support school choice, and increase the proportion travelling by sustainable means.
	DfES has policy responsibility for home to school transport and will be talking to local authorities interested in running Pathfinder schemes, including passenger transport executives where relevant, later this year. Formal expressions of interest will only be sought after the Bill has been enacted, and formal consultation on the Pathfinder guidance and prospectus has taken place. DfES will support schemes, which it anticipates will start in September 2009, with £4 million pump priming and annual revenue support building up over several years to £12 million.

Small Change Big Difference Campaign

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department and its agencies have taken following the launch of the Government's 'small change big difference' campaign.

Gillian Merron: The Department for Transport promotes the health benefits of more walking and cycling through its initiatives to encourage more sustainable travel and through publications, such as 'walk in to work out'.
	As the programme of work develops the Department of Health will be working across all of Government to ensure the programme joins up to promote maximum impact. DH is leading the implementation for this initiative as part of its cross-Government commitment to deliver the public health White Paper 'choosing health'.

Special Advisers

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much has been paid in  (a) salary,  (b) travelling expenses,  (c) subsistence allowance and  (d) removal expenses to special advisers in his private office in each of the last five years.

Gillian Merron: In respect of  (a) since 2003, the Government have published on an annual basis the names and overall cost of special advisers and the number in each payband. For information relating to the last financial year I refer the hon. Member to the written ministerial statement made by my right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister, on 21 July 2005  Official Report, columns 158-61WS.
	Information on Special Advisers salaries for the last financial year is currently being collected and will be published in the normal way when it is ready.
	The Department for Transport was formed in May 2002. The total recorded travel  (b) and subsistence costs  (c) for Special Advisers since then are:
	
		
			  Financial Year  Travel and Subsistence (£) 
			 2002-03 1,296.51 
			 2003-04 834.30 
			 2004-05 1,080.08 
			 2005-06 5,425.26 
		
	
	It is not possible to disaggregate amounts spent on travel and subsistence.
	The amount spent on travel and subsistence in 2005-06 is higher than in previous years, largely as a consequence of travel required due to the UK's Presidency of the European Union between July and December 2005.
	All official travel by Special Advisers is undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Ministerial Code and the Civil Service Management Code.
	The Department for Transport has no record of payments of removal expenses for Special Advisers.

Telephone Advice Lines

Andrew Love: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many telephone advice lines his Department and its non-departmental public bodies support; and how many telephone advisers each employs; and how much funding is provided by  (a) his Department and its non-departmental public bodies,  (b) other Government Departments,  (c) the private sector and  (d) the voluntary sector.

Gillian Merron: Within DfT(c) the only area running advice lines is Mobility Advice Vehicle Information Service (MAVIS), who have three lines:
	MAVIS information line
	National number for the UK Forum of Mobility Centres
	Blue Badge Enquiry Line
	A total of three staff are employed to provide information services, which include answering the advice lines. It is therefore not possible to calculate the cost of answering these advice lines.
	DfT agencies and NDPBs—The overall number of advice lines in use by DfT's agencies and NDPBs is 41, with the number of staff involved in support of these advice lines being 836.
	Identifying the specific costs associated with these lines would incur disproportionate cost—many staff involved are not solely employed as telephone advisors. Funding for the agency's and NDPBs' advice lines come from both the DfT and the private sector.
	Tables giving details for the agency and NDPBs' advice lines, including funding have been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Single Sciences

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will make a statement on changes to the arrangements for studying single sciences at GCSE level.

Parmjit Dhanda: The science and innovation investment framework 2004 to 2014: next steps document outlines our commitment to encourage schools to provide greater access to the three separate sciences. By September 2008 our aim is that all pupils achieving at least level 6 at key stage 3 will have access to study three separate science GCSEs, to increase progression to, and attainment at, A level science.

Africa (Children's Policies)

Sally Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what action his Department has taken to pursue the commission for Africa's recommendation on support for children's policies in Africa.

Bill Rammell: We have recently supported a very successful young carer's workshop in Nairobi in partnership with the Commonwealth organisation for social work, the Commonwealth youth programme and the children's society.
	I am particularly pleased there was such a strong contribution from young carers from Africa and the UK. The conference has strengthened the voice of young people who carrying out these difficult responsibilities in very challenging situations.

Ataullah Siddiqui

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what process was undertaken to assess the suitability of Ataullah Siddiqui for the role of adviser to Government on Islam in Higher Education;
	(2)  what steps his Department took to investigate whether there were links between Ataullah Siddiqui and the Jamaat-e-Islami Party prior to his appointment as adviser to the Government on Islam in Higher Education;
	(3)  what steps his Department took to investigate whether there were links between the Islamic Foundation of Leicester, the Markfield Institute of Higher Education and the Jamaat-e-Islami Party prior to the appointment of Ataullah Siddiqui as adviser to the Government on Islam in Higher Education.

Bill Rammell: I have appointed Dr. Siddiqi to advise the Department on how the quality of information about Islam available to students in universities and colleges can be improved. Dr. Siddiqi will be taking account of a range of views, and will be making recommendations early in 2007.
	I appointed Dr. Siddiqi to this role because after careful consideration I decided he was the best qualified of a number of candidates. Dr. Siddiqi has a commitment to improving relationships between Muslims and the wider community, and is vice-chair of the Christian-Muslim forum launched by the Archbishop of Canterbury in January 2006. He has a distinguished academic record and an appropriate level of understanding of the education system. While the content of his report is a matter for him to decide, after appropriate consultation, Dr. Siddiqi shares the Government's concern that the material available about Islam in educational institutions is often unduly narrow in its outlook, and does not deal adequately with the role of Islam in a modern pluralistic society.
	Dr. Siddiqi has assured me categorically that he has no links to the Jamaat-e-lslam Party.
	Dr. Siddiqi is director of the Markfield Institute for Higher Education, although his appointment is in a personal capacity. The Markfield Institute of Higher Education is a higher education institution whose courses are validated by the University of Loughborough, and are subject to an audit of quality by the Quality Assurance Agency. It is sponsored by the Islamic Foundation Trust, an organisation which has a number of collaborations with universities in the UK and overseas. Neither Markfield nor the Islamic Foundation Trust have organisational links to Jamaat-e-lslam.

Children Centre Support

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills which individuals and organisations his Department consulted before making the decision to contract out children centre support work from the Department.

Beverley Hughes: The decision to contract out support for the roll out of children's centres followed a recommendation from a wider review of the Government's 10-Year Childcare Strategy, during which a wide range of stakeholders were consulted, including local authority lead officials, children's centre managers and Sure Start and Children's Fund regional team leaders.
	Before deciding to accept this recommendation the Department—in addition to work with a range of its own staff- held discussions with the Training and Development Agency for Schools, the Children's Workforce Development Council, with Government Office Directors of Children and Learners and with the Department's Trade Union side.

Information Technology

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the  (a) originally estimated,  (b) most recently estimated and  (c) outturn cost was in each of the five largest information technology contracts agreed by his Department with outside suppliers over the last five years.

Phil Hope: The information as requested is not readily available centrally within the Department for Education and Skills. To respond fully would involve an extensive internal and external information collection exercise which would exceed the recommended disproportionate cost threshold.
	An analysis of the Department's individual learning account (ILA) programme is given in the report: 'The House of Commons Committee of public accounts (2003), individual learning accounts, tenth report of session 2002-03' (Ref: HC 544), TSO, London.
	An analysis of the Department's UK e-university project is given in the report: 'The House of Commons Education and Skills select committee (2005),UK e-university, third report of session 2004-05'(Ref: HC 205), TSO, London
	In addition, I refer the hon. Member to the answers given by the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children Young People and Families on 13 June 2005,  Official Report, column 192W; and, 3 November 2005,  Official Report, column 1314W.

Information Technology

Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans he has to improve the quality of information and communication technology teaching in schools.

Phil Hope: Through the national strategies and national council for school leadership we are developing materials and peer to peer support to help school leaders and teachers make the best use of information and communications technology teaching to raise standards across the curriculum. We are supporting schools to invest in new teaching technologies such as interactive whiteboards and tablet PCs that are transforming many classrooms.

Disability Access

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether any building in her Department falls short of disability access regulations.

Geoff Hoon: All Foreign and Commonwealth Office buildings in the UK meet the access requirements under disability access regulations, with the exception of a small number of portacabins at Hanslope Park which were erected prior to the regulations coming into force. These have limited access for people with a mobility disability and are due for demolition within the next two years. At present no one with such disability requires access to the portacabins. If access were needed we would look at the options available in accordance with the disability Discrimination Act.

Zimbabwe

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will take steps to ensure that Arthur Mutambara of the Movement for Democratic Change is released from custody in Zimbabwe or given a fair trial.

Ian McCartney: We note with concern the arrest of Arthur Mutumbara and his party colleagues. They were released on 19 May. It is not yet clear if charges will be pressed. Our embassy in Harare has been and remains in contact with Mr. Mutambara's associates. This appears to be yet another instance of the Zimbabwean Government harassing those who oppose it. We will continue to press for the restoration of democracy and the rule of law.

Information Technology

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how much was spent on information technology (IT) sourced from outside her Cabinet Office in each of the last five years; who is responsible for such projects in the Cabinet Office; and what IT  (a) expertise and  (b) qualifications they possess.

Patrick McFadden: The amount spent on information technology (IT) hardware, software, consultancy and services sourced from outside the Department in each of the last five financial years is, shown in the table.
	
		
			   Expenditure (£) 
			 2001-02 16,630,784 
			 2002-03 16,719,547 
			 2003-04 21,195,208 
			 2004-05 22,385,617 
			 2005-06 35,756,263 
		
	
	These totals do not include the costs of ancillary or supporting IT provided as an integral part of contracts for other goods and services and not separately identified.
	The figures for 2005-06 are subject to audit. Audited figures will be available in the published resource accounts, due before the summer recess.
	Overall policy for IT projects in the Department falls under the shared services director in the e-Government unit. The current post holder has 20 years experience in IT management roles in both private and public sectors and is a qualified accountant.

Civil Service Uniform

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many security guards wearing Crown-based insignia  (a) there are in and  (b) have been contracted by the civil service, broken down by community background.

David Hanson: The following table outlines the number of security guards employed and contracted by the Northern Ireland civil service who are supplied with uniforms bearing a crown based insignia.
	
		
			  Security guards employed and contracted by NICS 
			   Number 
			 Security guards in NICS who wear crown insignia 49 
			 Security guards contracted by NICS who wear crown insignia — 
			 Total 49 
		
	
	The following table provides a breakdown by community background for the entire NICS guard force, as the information for only those supplied with uniforms with crown based insignia or who are contracted by the NICS is not readily available.
	
		
			  Community background  Number of staff 
			 Protestant 82 
			 Catholic 10 
			 Not determined 14 
			 Total 106

Departmental Staff

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what incentives  (a) each Department in Northern Ireland and  (b) the Northern Ireland Office, offer to encourage staff to share vehicles when travelling to work.

David Cairns: The Chief Executive of Roads Service (Dr. Malcolm McKibbin) has been asked to write to the hon. Gentleman in response to this question.
	 Letter from Dr. Malcolm McKibbin:
	You recently asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland a Parliamentary Question about what incentives each department in Northern Ireland, including the Northern Ireland Office, offer to encourage staff to share vehicles when travelling to work.
	I have been asked to reply as this issue falls within my responsibility as Chief Executive of Roads Service.
	The Travelwise Campaign in Northern Ireland is aimed at promoting more sustainable transport options, including walking, cycling, greater use of public transport and the concept of car sharing, particularly for the journey to work and places of education.
	Travelwise NI assists Government Departments as well as private and public sector businesses in promoting workplace travel plans, to encourage staff to travel more sustainably. Car Sharing is only one element of a travel plan.
	To facilitate car sharing in Government Departments, in June last year, Nigel Hamilton, Head of the NI Civil Service launched the Travelwise NI Car Share Scheme on behalf of Roads Service. This is a no-charge web-based scheme where Civil Servants are encouraged to go on-line at www.travelwisenicarshare.com and register their journey details. The system automatically searches for a person travelling in the same direction and puts staff in contact with each other to share their journeys.
	The scheme has been widely promoted across Government Departments through the media, information days, internal magazines and competitions and has now been rolled out to businesses and to the public. To date, 1312 members have registered on the scheme and 38% of members have had their journeys matched and are potentially car sharing.
	By way of local incentives, the Department for Regional Development created 21 dedicated car share spaces at its Headquarters in Clarence Court, Belfast, to encourage greater car sharing among staff. I also understand that the Department of Finance and Personnel and the Department of Education offer staff who car share a guaranteed car parking space at some of their buildings.
	I should also add that Roads Service is currently responsible for 20 Park & Ride/Park & Share car parks across the province which provide 1478 car park spaces. Civil Servants, like any member of the public, can park their cars at these sites and share the journey to work, thereby reducing travel costs. These sites are promoted at a Divisional level as well as through the Travelwise NI Website (www. travelwiseni.com). Further Park & Ride and Park & Share sites have been identified within the Sub-Regional Transport Plan and the Regional Strategic Transport Network Transport Plan.

Departmental Staff

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many non-pensionable bonuses were awarded to staff in  (a) each department in Northern Ireland and  (b) the Northern Ireland Office, in each of the last three years; and what the total cost was.

David Hanson: The following table details the non-pensionable bonuses that were awarded to staff in each Department of the Northern Ireland Administration and the Northern Ireland Office (including Agencies), in each of the last three financial years.
	It is part of the Government's pay policy that not all reward should be in the form of consolidated increases: non-consolidated, non-pensionable payments should also be part of civil service pay strategies and should focus on in-year performance. These payments, which form part of the annual NICS pay deal, represent the bulk of the following figures.
	
		
			   2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  All three years 
			  Department  Number of bonuses  Cost  Number of bonuses  Cost  Number of bonuses  Cost  Total number  Total cost 
			 DFP 2,500 579,547 2,606 354,974 2,733 856,099 7,839 1,790,620 
			 DARD 2,554 524,265 2,868 353,296 2,710 781,372 8,132 1,658,933 
			 OFMDFM 324 130,510 383 113,665 369 207,305 1,076 451,480 
			 DCAL 442 84,388 380 58,760 410 126,786 1,232 269,934 
			 DRD 2,451 520,671 2,753 340,103 2,897 861,459 8,101 1,722,233 
			 DOE 1,984 499,538 2,387 500,367 1,745 485,997 6,116 1,485,902 
			 DETI 553 128,722 586 79,030 632 217,466 1,771 425,218 
			 DSD 6,589 1,160,602 7,500 744,997 7,803 1,967,979 21,892 3,873,578 
			 DHSSPS 843 270,675 939 186,259 951 386,117 2,733 843,051 
			 DE 571 152,338 629 118,880 571 207,665 1,771 478,883 
			 DEL 1,245 228,849 1,349 122,607 1,591 415,092 4,185 766,548 
			 NIO 990 250,714 2,709 499,138 2,004 650,772 5,703 1,400,624 
			 Total 21,046 4,530,819 25,089 3,472,076 24,416 7,164,109 70,551 15,167,004

Roads

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much the Department for Regional Development spent on improving the road network in County  (a) Tyrone,  (b) Derry and  (c) Fermanagh in each of the past five years; and how much the Department has budgeted for (i) 2006-07 and (ii) the next two years for roads in these counties.

David Cairns: The Chief Executive of Roads Service (Dr. Malcolm McKibbin) has been asked to write to the hon. Gentleman in response to this question.
	 Letter from Dr. Malcolm McKibbin, dated 25 May 2006:
	You recently asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland a Parliamentary Question about how much the Department for Regional Development spent on improving the road network in County (a) Tyrone, (b) Derry and (c) Fermanagh in each of the past five years; and how much the Department has budgeted for (i) 2006-07 and (ii) the next two years for roads in these counties.
	I have been asked to reply as this issue falls within my responsibility as Chief Executive of Roads Service.
	First of all I must advise that Roads Service does not maintain details of expenditure on a county basis. However, such information is available on a district council basis. The table below details Roads Service's expenditure on major and minor capital works improvements for the nine district councils whose boundaries straddle Counties Tyrone, Londonderry and Fermanagh:
	
		
			  Roads Service expenditure on major and minor works by council area 
			  £000 
			  Council Area  2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  Fermanagh  
			 Major Capital 114 2 0 0 345 
			 Minor Capital 847 581 831 1,565 994 
			 Total Fermanagh 961 583 831 1,565 1,339 
			   
			  Strabane  
			 Major Capital 4,350 7,324 1,299 660 373 
			 Minor Capital 382 291 557 1,088 1,446 
			 Total Strabane 4,732 7,615 1,856 1,748 1,819 
			   
			  Omagh  
			 Major Capital 103 137 340 76 0 
			 Minor Capital 766 1,254 542 1,139 1,889 
			 Total Omagh 869 1,391 882 1,215 1,889 
			   
			   
			  Dungannon  
			 Major Capital 89 0 173 1,928 64 
			 Minor Capital 696 249 318 1,197 1,669 
			 Total Dungannon 785 249 491 3,125 1,733 
			   
			  Cookstown  
			 Major Capital 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Minor Capital 460 201 350 757 434 
			 Total Cookstown 460 201 350 757 434 
			   
			  Londonderry  
			 Major Capital 824 73 82 352 426 
			 Minor Capital 1,062 1,423 1,082 1,412 1,360 
			 Total Londonderry 1,886 1,496 1,164 1,764 1,786 
			   
			  Limavady  
			 Major Capital 1,241 7,228 3,268 230 241 
			 Minor Capital 601 149 0 1,596 952 
			 Total Limavady 1,842 7,377 3,268 1,826 1,193 
			   
			   
			  Coleraine  
			 Major Capital 33 4 1 0 0 
			 Minor Capital 858 496 886 1,121 934 
			 Total Coleraine 891 500 887 1,121 934 
			   
			  Magherafelt  
			 Major Capital Works 16 0 0 0 0 
			 Minor Capital Works 661 434 274 1,308 1,693 
			 Total Magherafelt 677 434 274 1,308 1,693 
		
	
	In providing the above information I should explain that Roads Service does not simply split its total budget for capital expenditure on roads across all the district council areas. Major road improvements are prioritised on a countrywide basis taking account of a broad range of criteria such as strategic planning policy, traffic flow, number of accidents, potential travel save times, environment impact and value for money. While the actual spend on a major works scheme may be within one district council area, the benefits of such schemes are not confined to the district council, constituency or county in which they are located.
	Roads Service expenditure on minor road improvements includes minor works, accident remedial schemes, transportation measure and minor bridge strengthening. The resources available for such works are allocated to the 4 Roads Service Divisions and, in turn, apportioned across district council areas on a needs-based priority approach using indicators such as population, weighted road lengths and the number of accidents. This ensures, so far as possible, an equitable distribution of funds across the country.
	With regard to the capital budget for 2006-07, again it is not possible to split this budget into counties. The total Roads Service Capital Budget in 2006/07 is £111M and the split per the relevant Roads Service Division is as follows:
	The initial budget allocation for major and minor works in Western Division is £22M (£7M Minor, £15M Major). Our Western Division incorporates 6 District Council areas—Cookstown, Dungannon, Fermanagh, Omagh, Magherafelt, and Strabane.
	The initial budget allocation for major and minor works in Northern Division is £12M (£6M Minor, £6M Major). Our Northern Division incorporates 8 District Council areas—Antrim, Ballymena, Ballymoney, Coleraine, Derry, Larne, Limavady, and Moyle.
	With regard to the capital budget for the next two years I can advise that the total Roads Service capital budget in 2007/08 is £112M. However, this budget has not yet been allocated to our Divisions. The 2008/09 budget is outside the current budget period and cannot be confirmed.

Roads

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the  (a) budget and  (b) timetable is for construction of the Skeoge Link Road in Derry.

David Cairns: The Chief Executive of Roads Service (Dr Malcolm McKibbin) has been asked to write to the hon. Gentleman in response to this question.
	 Letter from Dr Malcolm McKibbin, dated 25 May 2006:
	You recently asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland a Parliamentary Question about what the (a) budget and (b) timetable is for construction of the Skeoge Link Road in Deny. I have been asked to reply as this issue falls within my responsibility as Chief Executive of Roads Service.
	I can confirm that good progress is being made by Roads Service to secure the delivery of the Skeoge Link Road in Derry. The road is to be constructed to dual carriageway standard at an estimated cost of £5 million.
	The Notice of Intention to make a Vesting Order was published in March 2006 and no objections to the Notice were received. The Scheme was passed for planning approval at a meeting with Derry City Council on 16 May 2006 and discussions are ongoing with developers to complete the statutory agreements.
	Roads Service has completed the detailed design of the scheme and will be in a position to invite tenders at the end of June 2006. This would enable construction to commence in September. However, this time scale remains dependant on the agreed transfer of lands from the developers, which has still not been secured.
	I would like to assure you of Roads Service's continued commitment to provide this much needed road scheme, which would complete the strategic route from the Foyle Bridge through to Buncrana Road, remove through traffic from Glengalliagh Road, and will also unlock land for further housing and industrial development.

Roads

Eddie McGrady: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much roads maintenance funding has been allocated to each of the district electoral areas in  (a) Down and  (b) Newry and Mourne Council area in each of the last 10 years.

David Cairns: The Chief Executive of Roads Service (Dr. Malcolm McKibbin) has been asked to write to the hon. Gentleman in response to this question.
	 Letter from Dr. Malcolm McKibbin, dated 25 May 2006 
	You recently asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland a Parliamentary Question about how much roads maintenance funding has been allocated to each of the district electoral areas in (a) Down and (b) Newry and Mourne Council area in each of the last 10 years.
	I have been asked to reply as this issue falls within my responsibility as Chief Executive of Roads Service.
	First of all I must advise that Roads Service does not maintain details of expenditure on a district electoral area basis. However, such information is available on a district council basis. Details of roads maintenance funding allocated by district council area are only available from 1999/2000 and are detailed in the table below:
	
		
			  £000 
			   Council area 
			   Down  Newry and Mourne 
			 1999/2000 2,328 3,234 
			 2000/01 3,608 4,466 
			 2001/02 4,366 5,456 
			 2002/03 4,641 5,256 
			 2003/04 5,089 5,042 
			 2004/05 7,069 7,567 
		
	
	In providing this information I should explain that the funds available for roads maintenance are allocated to the 4 Roads Service Divisions who, in turn, allocate across district council areas. The resources available for each maintenance activity (resurfacing, patching, gully emptying, grass cutting etc.) are apportioned to district councils using appropriate indicators of need. This ensures, so far as is possible, an equitable distribution of funds.

Israel

David Amess: To ask the Prime Minister when he visited the State of Israel in an official capacity in each year since 1997; what matters were discussed; and if he will make a statement.

Tony Blair: Since 1999 the Government have published an annual list of all visits overseas undertaken by Cabinet Ministers costing £500 or more during each financial year. Copies of these lists are available in the Library of the House—Information on the number of officials accompanying me on overseas visits is included in the list. All travel is undertaken in accordance with the rules set out in the ministerial code and travel by Ministers. Information for the year 2005-06 will be published as soon as it is ready after the end of the financial year.
	I have regular discussions with the Israeli Government on a wide range of issues. Transcripts of press conferences I have held are available on the No. 10 website.

Commonwealth Recruits

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of recruits to the Army in each of the last 10 years came from other Commonwealth countries.

Tom Watson: The proportion of those personnel who have entered untrained strength to the Army who have a nationality of a Commonwealth country (excluding UK) are as follows:
	
		
			  Proportion of Commonwealth (excluding the UK) inflow into the untrained strength of the Regular Army 
			  Percentage 
			   Officer  Soldier  Total 
			 1995-96 1.6 0.3 0.4 
			 1996-97 2.1 0.3 0.3 
			 1997-98 1.3 0.2 0.3 
			 1998-99 1.5 0.7 0.7 
			 1999-2000 1.2 2.8 2.7 
			 2000-01 1.5 5.1 4.9 
			 2001-02 1.5 8.1 7.7 
			 2002-03 3.5 12.7 12.2 
			 2003-04 3.3 10.9 10.5 
			 2004-05 4.0 8.8 8.5 
			 2005-06 1.9 5.4 5.1 
			  Notes:1. The figures are for trained Regular Army only and therefore exclude Gurkhas, Home Service battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment, Full Time Reserve Service, Mobilised Reserves, TA and all other Reserves.2. Figures are based on Untrained Intake into the Army and for soldiers include inflows from Illegal Absence. Rates are based on all inflow regardless of nationality.3. The nationality given above is that recorded on inflow to the untrained strength and is not necessarily the same as the nationality at birth.4. Includes inflows only from those with a nationality of a Commonwealth country. It therefore excludes inflows from those with a nationality of UK, UK dependency, Eire and Other Countries.

Hospitals

Peter Viggers: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many surgical and medical treatments were undertaken in respect of  (a) service personnel and  (b) civilians at the Royal Hospital Haslar in the last 12 months, broken down by types of treatments.

Tom Watson: The surgical and medical treatments undertaken at the Royal Hospital Haslar in the 12 month period from 1 April 2005 until 31 March 2006 are as follows:
	
		
			  Service personnel 
			  Category  Number 
			 Chronic Pain 19 
			 Endoscopy 166 
			 Ear, Nose and Throat 24 
			 General Surgery 238 
			 Maxillo-facial 376 
			 Orthopaedic 372 
			 Plastic Surgery 57 
			 Total 1,252 
		
	
	
		
			  Civilians 
			  Category  Number 
			 Chemotherapy 1,107 
			 Chronic Pain 311 
			 Endoscopy 1,903 
			 Ear, Nose and Throat 43 
			 General Surgery 2,733 
			 Maxillo-facial 531 
			 Orthopaedic 6,601 
			 Plastic Surgery 673 
			 Total 13,902

Iraq

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 4 May 2006,  Official Report, columns 1813-14W, on Iraq, whether service by a UK civilian police officer engaged in training Iraqi police officers would qualify for the award of an Iraq Medal.

Tom Watson: A civilian police officer engaged in training Iraqi police officers would not have been sent to Iraq by the Ministry of Defence to work in direct support of the military and would therefore not qualify to receive the MOD Iraq Medal.
	It is possible that such a civilian police officer would qualify to receive a special medal which is to be issued to recognise service by UK civilians in Iraq. This medal has been approved by the Queen and was announced at the end of June 2005 by the Prime Minister. The eligibility criteria for this second Iraq medal is currently being considered by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and will be announced in due course.

Military Aircraft

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many  (a) Canberra, (b) Nimrod and  (c) Tornado GR4A aircraft are (i) in service and (ii) fit for purpose.

Adam Ingram: The following table shows the numbers of Canberra, Nimrod and Tornado GR aircraft that are planned to be in service at the end of March 2007, and that were fit for purpose (FFP) last month.
	
		
			  Aircraft type  Total fleet  Number of Aircraft FFP  (Average for April 2006)( 1) 
			 Canberra(2) 0 n/a 
			 Nimrod(3) 22 15 
			 Tornado GR(4) 139 49 
			 (1) Figures are rounded to the nearest whole number.(2) The Canberra fleet is due to be withdrawn from service this year. Because of the small size of the Canberra fleet, FFP is recorded in terms of sorties.(3) Includes Nimrod Rl and Nimrod MR2 aircraft.(4) Tornado GR4A fleet numbers are not recorded separately 
		
	
	Aircraft are deemed fit for purpose if they are capable of undertaking the required task on a given day. Aircraft are not available for tasking if they are undergoing scheduled maintenance, modification programmes or any other unforeseen rectification work that can arise on a day to day basis. The figures do not reflect the fact that an aircraft assessed as not fit for purpose may be returned to the front line at very short notice to meet the operational need.

Nuclear Powered Submarines

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with whom responsibility lies for  (a) monitoring of any discharges from nuclear powered submarines using (i) Z berths and (ii) X berths and  (b) clean up operations which may be required; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Discharges directly to the environment from nuclear powered submarines at Z berths and X berths are not permitted.
	The responsibility for monitoring and clean-up operations, should any be required, rests with the dockyard companies, naval base commanders or the Royal Navy, depending on the location of the berth.
	The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) Environmental Sciences Department monitors the level of radioactive pollution around Z and X berths as part of its wider marine environmental survey programme, the findings from which are published annually.

Priory Clinic Group

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has paid to the Priory Clinic Group for psychiatric services in each of the last five years.

Tom Watson: The Ministry of Defence's contract with the Priory Group, which commenced on 1 April 2004, only provides in-patient care. Community based care is available to every military unit through our 15 Departments of Community Mental Health, located in military establishments in the UK, with additional satellite units in Germany and Cyprus. Medical diagnosis is performed by fully trained and accredited mental health personnel with a full range of National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) platinum standard psychiatric treatments. These help to ensure better access to mental health support within or close to an individual's unit or home. Community-based psychiatry also means Defence Medical Service mental health staff work within their local service community, and so are more closely aligned with their operational role.
	The following table gives the sums paid by MOD to the Priory Group since April 2004, plus costs for interim services provided by the Priory Group between December 2003 and the start of the current contract. This figure takes into account the cost of assessing patients as well as any treatment programmes provided. The Priory contract replaced the care provided by the Duchess of Kent Psychiatric Hospital whose costs in its final year of operation were some £10 million.
	
		
			  Financial year  Amount spent (£) 
			 2003-04 357,877 
			 2004-05 4,147,963 
			 2005-06 4,441,181 
			 2006 to date 379,283 
			 Total 9,326,304

Private Finance Initiative

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the Answer of 3 June 2005,  Official Report, columns 242-3W, on the private finance initiative, what total value of assets and liabilities for each of the listed private finance initiatives and public private partnerships is recorded on the Government Balance Sheet; what proportion of assets and liabilities is listed; what the accounting treatment is for assets and liabilities; and whether it is compatible with  (a) generally-accepted accounting practices and  (b) international financial reporting standards.

Adam Ingram: 10 projects are on the Ministry of Defence Balance Sheet from the 49 Private Finance Initiative Projects (PFI) listed in my reply of 13 June 2005,  Official Report, column 16W. The following table provides details of the 10 On Balance Sheet projects, their asset and liability values and values of these projects expressed as a proportion of the Department totals. The financial data given in the Table accords with the data published in the MOD Annual Reports & Accounts 2004-05.
	
		
			  MOD On Balance sheet PFI projects—FY 2004-05 
			   £ 
			  Project Title  Asset  Liability 
			 Defence Animal Centre (DAC) 16,571,955 9,539,917 
			 Defence Electronic Commerce Service (DECS) 2,008,906 4,143,061 
			 Defence Helicopter Flying School (DHFS) 80,683,442 52,172,982 
			 Field Electrical Power Supplies (FEPS) 69,505,570 71,430,255 
			 Heavy Equipment Transporters (HET) 58,398,745 54,908,345 
			 Joint Services Command and Staff College—Excluding DHE Off Balance Sheet Element 77,823,858 47,698,992 
			 Main Building Refurbishment 342,930,295 342,930,295 
			 Naval Communications 56,982,073 57,595,523 
			 RAF Fylingdales (Power) 4,871,389 5,127,508 
			 RAF Lossiemouth Family Quarters 23,821,492 22,611,409 
			 Total 733,597,725 668,158,286 
			 Proportion percentage of all MoD 0.72 4.08 
		
	
	The Storage Facilities PFI Project has never resided on the MOD Balance Sheet; it resides on the DTI Balance Sheet.
	The Accounting Treatment judgements applied to assets and liabilities are based on:
	Accounting Standards Board's Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 5 (entitled "Reporting the Substance of Transactions")
	Accounting Standard Board's Application Note F (entitled "FRS5 —Reporting the Substance of Transactions: Private Finance Initiative and Similar Contracts; and
	HM Treasury Private Finance Taskforce's Technical (TTF) Note No 1 (How to Account for PFI transactions), ("the Treasury or TTF Guidance").
	The objective of the Technical Note (TN) is to provide additional practical guidance to public sector bodies on certain areas of the Application Note to ensure that the overarching principles of the Application Note are consistently applied.
	The Accounting Treatment judgements are made in compliance with UK Generally Accepted Accounting Practices (UKGAAP). International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) have not yet been adopted by HMG for Public Sector reporting.
	It should be noted that differences between asset and liability valuations arise due to timing differences emanating from respective write down procedures; Assets are written down on a straight line basis whereas financial liabilities are written down on an actuarial or equivalent basis in accordance with MoD accounting guidance.

Training Areas

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many tactical training areas there are in the West Midlands region.

Tom Watson: There are seven training areas in total in the West Midlands, of which only three are designated as 'Tactical Training Areas'. These are at Swynnerton, Nesscliff and Leek/Upper Hulme.

Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent research has been commissioned by his Department into the development of unmanned combat aerial vehicles.

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence is pursuing a twin-track strategy for exploring the conceptual thinking and the underlying technology for Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs).
	The first strand of this strategy concentrates on the concepts of employment, interoperability and cost effectiveness of UCAVs with specific emphasis on a UK/US coalition warfare environment. This work is being carried out as a collaborative Government-to-Government project arrangement under the auspices of the US Joint Unmanned Combat Air System Programme (J-UCAS) and began in March 2005.
	The second strand ensures we continue to work with UK industry to develop and explore critical technologies which have relevance to all types of Uninhabited Aerial Vehicles (such as survivability, propulsion and vehicle management). Central to this, and as set out in the Defence Industrial Strategy, will be a Technology Demonstrator Programme. Subject to a satisfactory value for money proposal, we hope to proceed with this later this year. It will be aimed at giving us and industry a better understanding of our indigenous capabilities, to inform any potential acquisition by the UK of a future UCAV capability.

Veterans Day

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when his Department first announced the decision to hold a Veterans' Day; and how the decision was announced.

Tom Watson: holding answer 20 March 2006
	The institution of a Veterans Day was announced by my right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 13 February 2006 in a speech he made at the Royal United Services Institute. The then Minister for Veterans wrote to hon. Members on 23 February to advise them that Veterans Day would be on 27 June each year.
	Last year's Veterans Awareness Week, which culminated in the memorable celebrations to mark the 60th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, gave us all a chance to pay tribute to those veterans who fought in the service of their country and to remember their immense sacrifice and the debt that we continue to owe to them.
	This year the day will focus on veterans of all ages and provide the opportunity to celebrate and raise public awareness of their diversity, achievements and the contribution they have made, and continue to make, to the Nation. It will also be an opportunity to recognise the service given by our current armed forces who will become tomorrow's veterans.
	We are encouraging organisations throughout the UK to support Veterans Day through their own events, and we are targeting school children, in particular those in the 9-11 age bracket who are currently learning about World War II, through an art competition.

Audiology Services

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  pursuant to the document "Tackling hospital waiting: the 18 week patient pathway", when she expects the action plan to cut waiting times for audiology to be published;
	(2)  what progress is being made in measuring waiting times for NHS hearing aid services; and if she will make a statement;
	(3)  pursuant to the document "Tackling hospital waiting: the 18 week patient pathway", what measures her Department will put in place to ensure that direct access referrals for audiology are not re-routed to ear, nose and throat consultants.

Ivan Lewis: The Department does not collect waiting time data for hearing aid services. However, since January 2006 we have been collecting waiting time and activity data for 15 diagnostic tests/procedures, including pure tone audiometry.
	As stated in the publication "Tackling hospital waiting: the 18 week patient pathway. An implementation framework" directly accessed audiology including adult hearing services are outside the scope of the 18 week patient pathway. However, a separate action plan is currently under consideration to improve access to those services outside the 18 weeks programme. The intention is to develop and take the work forward in partnership with stakeholders.
	The Department estimates that 80 per cent. of referrals to adult hearing services from general practitioners are direct to audiology departments. We acknowledge the risk that there may be pressure to redirect these existing direct referrals to ear, nose and throat consultants in secondary care, as this way patients would be covered by the 18 weeks target. The measures that are being taken to address this risk are detailed on page 31 of the publication "18 Week Patient Pathway: Delivery Resource Pack", which is available in the Library and on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/13/46/70/04134670.pdf.

Capita

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what meetings  (a) she and  (b) Ministers in her Department have held with directors and senior executives of (i) Capita Group plc and (ii) its subsidiaries since 1 January 2004; and whether (A) Capita Group plc and (B) its subsidiaries have provided input (1) in writing and (2) in person to policy discussions in her Department since 1 January 2004.

Ivan Lewis: The former Minister, Liam Byrne, Parliamentary Under Secretary for Care Services, met with John Tizard of Capita plc on 16 January 2006. Neither the Secretary of State nor the rest of her ministerial team have met with directors and senior executives of Capita plc or its subsidiaries since 1 January 2004.
	Capita plc or its subsidiaries have not been invited to input either in writing or in person to the Departments policy discussions.

Choose and Book System

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many and what proportion of  (a) GPs and  (b) GP practices have (i) registered to use and (ii) indicated an interest in using the new 'choose and book' system for hospital appointments from (A) within and (B) outside the pilot areas.

Ivan Lewis: holding answer 24 April 2006
	As at 15 May 2006, 35,577 (97 per cent.) general practitioners (GPs) had registered to use the 'choose and book' service and been issued with chip and pin style 'smartcards' to enable them to do so.
	As at the 16 May 2006, 5,073 (60 per cent.) GP practices had gone live with the 'choose and book' service, defined as having made at least one booking.
	As at 17 May 2006, over 344,000 referrals had been made through the 'choose and book' service. These bookings come from 300 of the 303 primary care trusts (PCTs) in England, which demonstrates a significantly larger usage of the system than the six PCTs that were 'early adopters' or pilots of 'choose and book'.
	The implementation team is now in the process of rolling out the system nationally across England.

Departmental Staff

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many and what proportion of  (a) staff and  (b) new staff employed in (i) her Department and (ii) each of the agencies for which she has responsibility were registered as disabled in each of the last three years for which data are available.

Ivan Lewis: The information requested is shown in the following tables.
	
		
			  Staff recorded as disabled, 2004 to 2006 
			   1 April 2004  1 April 2005  1 April 2006 
			   Disabled  Percent of disabled ( 1)  Disabled  Percent of disabled ( 1)  Disabled  Percent of disabled ( 1) 
			 Department of Health 140 7.1 100 6.5 116 6.0 
			 Medicines and healthcare products regulatory agency 10 1.0 7 0.8 9 1.1 
			 National health services estates 10 3.4 — — — — 
			 National health service pensions agency 10 4.1 — — — — 
			 National health service purchasing and supply agency 10 2.5 — — — — 
		
	
	
		
			  New staff employed; registered as disabled, 2003-04 to 2005-06 
			 Financial year  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			   Disabled  Percent of disabled  Disabled  Percent of disabled  Disabled  Percent of disabled 
			 Department of Health 3 2.9 12 7.1 — — 
			 Medicines and healthcare products regulatory agency — — — — 2 22 
			 National health service purchasing and supply agency — — — — — — 
			  Notes: (1). Proportions are based on staff whose disability status is known; unknown values are excluded.

Drug Treatment

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many individuals from Suffolk have entered drug rehabilitation treatment in each of the last five years.

Andy Burnham: The table shows how many individuals from Suffolk entered drug rehabilitation treatment between 2003 and 2005.
	
		
			   Number of individuals 
			 2003-04 1,075 
			 2004-05 1,340 
		
	
	The National Treatment Agency introduced a revised and more accurate methodology for counting the numbers of treatment in October 2004. Figures are not available for the years 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 although the potential for providing estimates based on data collecting using the earlier methodology is being explored.

Funding (Northamptonshire)

Sally Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) hospital doctors,  (b) nurses,  (c) general practitioners and  (d) other health service staff were employed in Northamptonshire in (i) 1997 and (ii) 2005.

Andy Burnham: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		
			  National health service hospital and community health services: NHS staff employed in the Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland strategic health authority (SHA) area by specified staff groups as at 30 September each specified year 
			  Headcount 
			   1997  2005 
			 Total NHS staff 28,276 35,869 
			 HCHS doctors(1) 1,611 2,360 
			 General medical practitioners (excluding retainers)(2) 908 1,021 
			 Qualified nursing, midwifery and health visiting staff including practice nurses 8,626 11,002 
			 Other NHS staff 17,131 21,486 
			 (1) Excludes hospital medical hospital practitioners and hospital medical clinical assistants, most of whom are general practitioners (GPs) working part time in hospitals(2) General medical practitioners, excluding retainers and registrars, includes contracted GPs, GMS others and PMS others. Prior to September 2004 this group included GMS unrestricted Principals, PMS contracted GPs, PMS salaried GPs, restricted principals, assistants, salaried doctors (Para 52 SFA), PMS other, flexible career scheme GPs and GP returners. Note:Data as at 30 September each year except GP and practice nurse data as at 1 October 1997 Sources:The Information Centre for health and social care general and personal medical services statisticsThe Information Centre for health and social care medical and dental workforce statisticsThe Information Centre for health and social care non-medical workforce census

Information Technology

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the ability of the NHS IT programme to respond to developments in information technology.

Caroline Flint: The national programme for information technology's (NPfIT) services and systems are based on modern, robust tools and technologies which have been tried and tested widely in business and in the IT industry. They are based on industry standard platforms that have been underpinned by enterprise wide arrangements that achieved large cost savings for the taxpayer and the national health service with market leading IT products from Microsoft, Oracle, Sun, Novell and others. They use industry standards in whose development the Department's NHS connecting for health agency takes an active role, where appropriate.
	NPfIT contracts specify service requirements and service levels rather than the underlying technical components. However, each contract contains an obligation for innovation and to keep up to date the technology employed including, as a minimum, a refresh of the relevant hardware and software platforms. Selection of the programme's suppliers was in part informed by their technical development plans and track record for continuing product development. In that way, the applications and technologies procured will not remain static, but keep pace with developing functional needs and technical developments.
	NHS connecting for health, under its research services contract with Gartner, maintains an awareness of emerging technology. The agency has also held a technology innovation forum involving contracted IT suppliers and those with whom enterprise wide arrangements are in place to promote technical innovation for the NHS. In specific areas where patient safety, infection control or clinical utility is an issue, or where innovation to address new policy requirements is needed, NHS connecting for health has taken an active role in the definition of standards in hardware and software to meet these requirements.
	In addition, an active programme of research and development is delivered on behalf of the programme by leading industry partners. This brings together the skills of the IT industry, the opportunities offered by NHS connecting for health, and NHS research and development skills to develop and evaluate new products and services of use to the NHS and of global interest. Its objective is to stimulate, support and evaluate innovations in the use of IT to improve patient experience, clinical practice and the process of care that could be generally used when the full functionality of the NPfIT will be universally available.

Ministerial Visits

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many official visits each Minister in her Department has made to  (a) dental practices,  (b) opticians,  (c) pharmacies,  (d) general practitioner surgeries,  (e) care homes,  (f) community hospitals,  (g) genito-urinary medicine clinics,  (h) ambulance trusts, (i) mental health trusts,  (j) rehabilitation services and  (k) stroke units since May 2005; and what the purpose was of each visit.

Ivan Lewis: The information requested, up to and including March 2006, is shown in the following table.
	
		
			   SofS  MS(HS)  MS(R)  MS(DQ)  MS(PH)  PS(CS) 
			 Dental practices 1 7 — — — — 
			 Opticians 1 7 — — — — 
			 Pharmacies 2 — — 4 — — 
			 General practitioner surgeries (1)4 — (2)8 — — — 
			 Care homes — — — — — 8 
			 Community hospitals 2 — 1 — — — 
			 Genito-urinary medicine clinics 1 — — — 3 — 
			 Ambulance trusts — — 4 — — — 
			 Mental health trusts 2 4 — — — 4 
			 Rehabilitation services — 4 — — 4 8 
			 Stroke units — — — — — 1 
			  Notes:  (1). Including 1 primary care centre  (2. )All PCCs SofS - Secretary of State for Health MS(HS) - Minister of State for Health MS(R) - Minister of State for Reform MS(DQ) - Minister of State for Delivery and Quality MS(PH) - Minister of State for Public Health PS(CS) - Parliamentary Under Secretary for Care Services 
		
	
	Ministerial visits and staff engagement are a key component of the Department's communication strategy. The purpose of visits is to gain a greater understanding of the challenges and successes experienced by staff, patients, carers and users in the national health service and social care economy. Visits also provide an opportunity to engage with frontline staff and patients.

Neo-natal Nursing

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many neo-natal nursing staff are employed in the Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire strategic health authority area.

Andy Burnham: The number of neo-natal nursing staff employed in the Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire strategic health authority (SHA) is not collected centrally.
	The numbers of qualified maternity nursing staff, including neo-natal nurses in the SHA area, are shown in the table.
	
		
			  National health service hospital and community health services: qualified maternity nursing staff in the Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA area by organisation as at 30 September 2005 
			 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA 1,387 
			 Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 338 
			 Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust 100 
			 Huntingdonshire PCT 11 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust 228 
			 James Paget Healthcare NHS Trust 86 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn NHS Trust 119 
			 Norfolk And Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust 237 
			 Peterborough Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 165 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust 103 
			  Source:  The Information Centre for health and social care non-medical workforce census 2005

NHS Finances

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 18 May 2006,  Official Report, column 1175W, on NHS finances, what responsibility the Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire strategic health authority has with regard to the financial management of the Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

Caroline Flint: Avon Gloucestershire and Wiltshire strategic health authority (SHA) has no formal responsibility over financial management of national health service foundation trusts (NHSFTs). SHAs no longer performance manage NHSFTs. As independently regulated organisations, the board of directors of a NHSFT is responsible for the organisation's performance.

Over the Counter Medicines Initiative

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the progress of the 'Better regulation for over the counter medicines' initiative.

Andy Burnham: I refer my hon. Friend to the written ministerial statement published in the House on 23 May 2006.

Patient Pathway Target

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what treatments are  (a) subject and  (b) not subject to the 18 week Patient Pathway Target; and for what reasons those in the latter group are not included in each case.

Andy Burnham: The principles and definitions underpinning the delivery of the 18 week patient pathway were published on 10 May 2006 in annex A of the publication "Tackling hospital waiting: the 18 week patient pathway: An implementation framework", which is available in the Library and on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/13/46/69/04134669.pdf
	The principles and definitions set out what is included in the 18 week pathway. The end of the 18 week pathway is defined as
	"the start of the first treatment that is intended to manage a person's disease, condition or injury".
	Not all treatments available would be appropriate as a first intervention and it will vary from patient to patient, so it is not possible to provide a list of treatments that are either included or excluded from the target.

Private Finance Initiative

Roger Godsiff: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of the debt of those hospitals which are in deficit and those hospitals which have been in deficit over the last two complete years for which figures are available is accounted for by the annual private finance initiative charge.

Andy Burnham: The table provides details of unitary payments and deficits from the audited accounts for private finance initiative (PFI) schemes for the last two complete years.
	There is no direct correlation between a trust meeting its PFI unitary charge and incurring a deficit, as the following table shows. Unitary payments—paid for from a trust's general revenue allocations—include elements for hard and soft facilities management services, financing costs as well as ensuring the availability of the facility and are just one component of a trust's total expenditure.
	
		
			2003-04  2004-05 
			  Commissioning body  Capital value (£ million)  Unitary payment (£ million)  Surplus/deficit (£000)  Unitary payment (£ million)  Surplus/deficit (£000) 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals 54 20.686 -4,398.000 21.203 0 
			 Berkshire Healthcare National Health Service Trust 30 4.206 -851.000 4.311 1 
			 Buckinghamshire Hospitals 45 10.813 -5,237.000 11.083 2,518 
			 Dartford and Gravesham Hospital 94 19.059 61.000 19.535 -1,146 
			 Hereford Hospitals NHS Trust 64 11.092 -18.000 11.370 20 
			 Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals(1) 22 2.000 17.000 2.050 -5,461 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Trust 76 17.501 182.000 18.374 -2,734 
			 Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust(1) 14 — -309.000 0.646 178 
			 North Cumbria Acute Hospitals 67 13.353 -4,133.000 13.687 13 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust 96 19.455 917.000 19.941 -9,186 
			 Queen Mary's Hospital Sidcup 15 1.938 41.000 1.987 -4,608 
			 Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust 26 — -1,593.000 0.263 -7,806 
			 South Tees Acute Hospital 122 26.170 -1,712.000 26.824 -8,898 
			 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust 46 7.327 -650.000 7.629 -21,656 
			 The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals 13 0.140 -7,612.000 3.106 -9,016 
			 West Middlesex University Hospital 60 9.700 137.000 10.500 -3,991 
			 Worcestershire Acute Hospitals 87 18.739 -12,801.000 19.207 2 
			 (1) Hard facilities management only therefore lower unitary payments compared to the rest of the table.

Primary Care Trusts

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the expected costs are of the implementation of the new configuration of primary care trusts in Bedfordshire; and if she will make a statement.

Andy Burnham: Total costs are dependant on a number of factors, including the number of new organisations, number of people in the new organisations, new pay ranges for very senior managers, as well as changes in estate costs following reconfiguration.
	For these reasons, it is not possible to give definite costs.
	We anticipate however that the reconfiguration of strategic health authorities and primary care trusts in Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire will save £7 million.

Primary Care Trusts

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has received about the impact of the new configuration of primary care trusts in Bedfordshire on the financial deficit of Bedfordshire Heartlands; what impact she expects the new configuration to have on the deficit; and if she will make a statement.

Andy Burnham: Ministers have received a range of representations about primary care trust (PCT) reconfiguration in Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire, however no representations have been received about the impact of PCT reconfiguration on the financial deficit of Bedfordshire Heartlands.
	We anticipate that the reconfiguration of strategic health authorities (SHAs) and PCTs in Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire will save £7 million.
	SHAs and PCTs are currently drawing up plans to achieve financial balance and these will be reviewed by the Department in June.

Runaway Children

Helen Southworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps her Department is taking to safeguard the health of children and young people who run away or go missing from home or care.

Ivan Lewis: The 'Every child matters: change for children' programme, a joint programme between the Department and the Department for Education and Skills, sets out the national framework for local change programmes to build services around the needs of children and young people. 'Change for children' is particularly concerned with targeting support on children most at risk of negative outcomes, such as those associated with running away or going missing. As part of this programme, the Children Act 2004 reforms place a duty on a range of health bodies to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and to co-operate with local authorities to improve integrated working arrangements so that key people and bodies are working towards shared outcomes.
	The national service framework for children, young people and maternity services published in September 2004 is a 10-year programme also intended to stimulate long-term and substantial improvement in children's health and in the better outcomes that are the result of better health. The Department will be seeking to make health an integral part of the everyday services that young people use.
	It is possible for any child or young person to access national health service primary medical services by registering as a patient with a local general practitioner practice. Where a child is being registered, an application may be made on their behalf by a parent or other person who has parental responsibility for them. It is also possible to access primary care services through a NHS walk-in centre or NHS Direct where there is no need to register.
	Services in all primary care trust areas, including primary, community, specialist and acute services need to take account of young people's needs. By creating services centred around the needs of children and families and ensuring that every child achieves their potential, these reforms will close the gap between those who do well and those who do not, including, for example, children and young people who runaway or go missing from home or care.

Section 64 Grants

Andy Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Health on what basis the decision was made to withhold the full payment of section 64 awards to charities in Loughborough; and when charities with two or three year grants will receive full payment.

Ivan Lewis: Voluntary and community sector organisations with continuing Section 64 grants will receive quarterly instalments during 2006-07 providing they have complied with the terms and conditions of the award. Full payment in 2006-07 will not be made until the final quarterly instalment is paid in January 2007.
	Payment of the first quarterly instalment due in April 2006 was delayed while a departmental central budget review took place. This has now concluded and outstanding payments made. Interim payments were offered to minimise financial risk.
	A decision to withhold full payments for an individual organisation would be made on a case by case basis.

Sexual Health

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she is taking to reduce  (a) unplanned pregnancies and  (b) sexually transmitted diseases; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 21 March 2006,  Official Report, column 250W.
	Measures to reduce the spread of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) were set out in the National Strategy for Sexual Health and HIV (200l) and the public health White Papers Choosing Health (November 2004) and Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services (January 2006), which are available in the Library and on the Department's website at www.dh.gov.uk.
	Sexual health and access to genitor-urinary medicine clinics is one of the six top priorities for the NHS in 2006-07. By 2008 everyone should be offered an appointment within 48 hours of contacting a genito-urinary medicine clinic. Strategic health authorities have all submitted plans to meet this target.
	In addition to these national measures, primary care trusts are responsible for providing sexual health services which meet the needs of their local populations. To support them in this role, the Department, working with professional bodies, has published recommended standards for sexual health services; a toolkit of best practice for sexual health promotion, and guidance on commissioning.

Sexual Health

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent assessment she has made of the impact of the use of condoms on the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: We have assessed the domestic and international evidence for the impact of condom use on the incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). For example, in the early 1990s, the Thai Government implemented a 100 per cent. condom programme to encourage sex workers to increase their use of condoms in commercial sex facilities. Rojanapithayakorn and Hanenberg (1996) reported that there was a substantial increase in the proportion of reported commercial sex acts in which condoms were used, i.e. from 25 per cent. in 1989 to 94 per cent. in 1995. During this time period, the incidence of curable STIs reported in Government clinics decreased dramatically, which was coupled with a decrease in the prevalence of HIV among Thai military recruits.
	Evidence such as this, has been used to guide the brief for the forthcoming sexual health campaign which will focus on the risks of unprotected sex and the benefits of using condoms to avoid the risk of STIs or unintended pregnancies.

Sexual Health

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been spent in each year since 1997 on free contraception in areas with high rates of sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancy; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: This information is not held centrally.
	We have asked primary care trusts (PCTs) to complete the first ever national questionnaire of contraceptive services. This has provided PCT sexual health leads and commissioners of contraceptive services with an audit tool to map their current service provision and to highlight gaps in local services so that they can develop contraceptive services that meet their local population needs. To support them in this role, the Department is investing 40 million over the next two years (20 million in both 2006-07 and 2007-08) to improve access to contraceptive services and to the full range of methods.
	Improving access to free contraception, including condoms, to avoid the risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or unplanned pregnancies is one of the key aims of the Government's White Paper 'Choosing health: making healthy choices easier'. Reducing the rate of value added tax on condoms and emergency hormonal contraception from the 1 July 2006 will also make the costs of these items more affordable to those who choose not to access free services.

Waiting Times

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the specialities where waiting times have increased to the maximum target waiting time since waiting times were last reviewed, broken down by NHS trust.

Andy Burnham: The information requested is available on the Department's website at:
	www.performance.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes/index.html where waiting time data is available broken down by both speciality and national health service trust.

Waiting Times

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 15 May 2006,  Official Report, column 758W, on waiting times, what definition of 'very few' she uses; and whether 'very few' means  (a) less than 10,  (b) less than 50,  (c) less than 100 or  (d) another amount.

Andy Burnham: Of the 771,100 patients waiting for treatment at the end of March 2006, 199 people had been waiting for longer than six months. This was three patients for every 10,000 waiting for treatmenta figure I would describe as very few.

Asylum Seekers

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers in Suffolk have  (a) had their application refused and  (b) been removed from the UK in each of the past five years.

Liam Byrne: The number of asylum seekers supported by the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) are published on a quarterly and annual basis, broken down by Local Authority. The next publication covering the first quarter of 2006 was published on the 23 May 2006, and will be available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics website at:
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html
	Data on asylum seekers supported by NASS broken down by parliamentary constituency are also available from the Library of the House.

Asylum Seekers

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers there were in West Suffolk constituency in each year since 1997.

Liam Byrne: The national asylum support service (NASS) assumed responsibility for the support of asylum seekers on 3 April 2000. The following table shows the numbers of asylum seekers (including dependants) supported by NASS in West Suffolk constituency as at the end of each year (available from December 2003).The number of asylum seekers supported by the national asylum support service (NASS) are published on a quarterly and annual basis, broken down by local authority.
	
		
			  Number of asylum seekers (including dependants) supported by NASS in West Suffolk constituency as at the end of each year from December 2003 
			  As at December each year:  In NASS accommodation  In receipt of subsistence only 
			 2003  5 
			 2004  * 
			 2005   
			 * = 1 or 2. Note:Figures are rounded to the nearest 5.

Drug-related Crime

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many incidents of drug-related crime there were in each police authority area in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

Tony McNulty: There are no figures available specifically on drug-related crime. The available information relates to recorded drug offences only and is given in the tables.
	
		
			  Recorded crimedrug offences 
			   2000-01  2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05 
			 Avon and Somerset 1,990 1,860 2,308 2,457 2,739 
			 Bedfordshire 896 1,009 1,069 1,130 1,131 
			 Cambridgeshire 829 798 904 1,047 1,174 
			 Cheshire 1,644 1,591 1,717 1,695 1,546 
			 Cleveland 952 1,109 1,685 1,368 1,45l 
			 Cumbria 949 925 1,038 1,189 1,321 
			 Derbyshire 1,374 1,635 1,877 1,932 2,023 
			 Devon and Cornwall 3,374 4,079 4,516 4,826 4,356 
			 Dorset 1,237 1,390 1,371 1,455 1,577 
			 Durham 1,207 1,317 1,289 1,205 1,062 
			 Dyfed-Powys 1,690 2,407 2,978 2,420 2,327 
			 Essex 2,208 2,212 2,377 2,295 2,328 
			 Gloucestershire 1,293 1,223 1,311 1,288 1,218 
			 Greater Manchester 4,932 4,698 5,667 5,981 6,703 
			 Gwent 2,196 1,729 1,585 1,422 1,332 
			 Hampshire 3,464 3,449 3,938 3,967 3,773 
			 Hertfordshire 1,441 1,350 1,553 1,678 1,754 
			 Humberside 1,342 1,513 1,883 1,874 2,048 
			 Kent 2,940 3,051 3,236 2,795 2,170 
			 Lancashire 3,124 3,169 4,084 3,640 3,411 
			 Leicestershire 1,395 1,705 1,629 1,821 1,942 
			 Lincolnshire 906 1,116 1,060 1,061 951 
			 London, City of 296 469 790 744 876 
			 Merseyside 4,421 4,390 5,419 5,497 5,649 
			 Metropolitan Police 23,626 26,204 33,311 32,332 33,011 
			 Norfolk 1,160 1,211 1,392 1,508 1,602 
			 Northamptonshire 967 958 979 971 1,477 
			 Northumbria 4,238 4,804 6,040 5,414 4,636 
			 North Wales 1,427 1,382 1,830 1,830 1,834 
			 North Yorkshire 1,259 1,491 1,582 1,624 1,690 
			 Nottinghamshire 2,028 2,070 2,352 2,830 2,667 
			 South Wales 3,038 3,907 3,872 3,837 3,705 
			 South Yorkshire 3,521 3,408 3,448 3,191 3,013 
			 Staffordshire 1,623 2,186 2,264 2,586 2,689 
			 Suffolk 1,178 1,292 1,689 1,923 1,974 
			 Surrey 1,858 1,872 1,934 1,689 1,904 
			 Sussex 2,002 2,602 2,665 3,050 3,343 
			 Thames Valley 3,364 4,093 4,903 5,404 6,167 
			 Warwickshire 629 659 751 944 914 
			 West Mercia 2,073 2,109 2,053 2,218 2,278 
			 West Midlands 7,519 7,578 8,828 6,656 7,840 
			 West Yorkshire 4,820 4,297 5,015 5,295 5,666 
			 Wiltshire 1,028 1,076 898 971 1,066 
			  113,458 121,393 141,090 141,060 142,338 
			 (1 )Numbers affected by the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standards which came into effect in 2002-03. Data not comparable with earlier years

Entry Visas

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to identify the persons granted entry visas to the UK in the last five years who have subsequently  (a) applied for asylum on entry and  (b) overstayed the time allowed by the visa; and if he will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: The Government are already committed to detecting those who fail to comply with their conditions of entry, including overstayers. Key initiatives to tackle such immigration abuse include: sharing information with other Government agencies and acting upon any intelligence we receive where appropriate and targeting embarkation controls at major UK ports to detect immigration offenders who are leaving the UK.
	Roll out of a programme to capture biometrics details of visa applicants will be completed by 2008. This will enable IND to identify those who applied for a visa and subsequently claim asylum in the UK without documentation. UKvisas' Central Reference System is used to access further details when someone applying for asylum has retained their original documentation and identity.

Foreign Prisoners

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the crimes committed by those foreign prisoners released into the community without proper application of the deportation review process.

Liam Byrne: I refer to the written ministerial statement made by my right hon. Friend, the Home Secretary, on 15 May 2006.

IND Contracts

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were employed by the immigration and nationality directorate on temporary contracts in each of the last five years.

John Reid: The number of people employed on temporary contracts by the immigration and nationality directorate is recorded in the following table. Additionally, the directorate has contracts with employment agencies for the provision of temporary workers and these figures have also been included in order to provide a full picture.
	The figures in the following table show the average numbers of temporary workers in the organisation beginning with the financial year 2002-03. 2002 is the earliest date for which figures are available. The final figure relates to 31 March 2006 and represents the latest actual position.
	
		
			   Casual  Agency  Total 
			 2002-03 60 1,232 1,292 
			 2003-04 135 1,170 1,305 
			 2004-05 196 1,002 1,198 
			 2005-06 220 1,303 1,523 
			 2006 239 1,623 1,862

Police

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the annual cost is of employing  (a) a police officer and  (b) a probation officer in each police authority area; and what the equivalent figure was in each of the last five years.

Tony McNulty: The answers are given in the following tables.
	
		
			  Constable salaries in England and Wales 
			  September  Non-London minimum salary ()  Non-London maximum salary ()  London minimum salary ()  London maximum salary ()  Employment costs (Percentage)  Total cost (non-London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (non-London) of maximum salary ()  Total cost (London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (London) of maximum salary () 
			 2001 17,733 28,062 23,844 34,173 24.6 22,095 34,965 29,710 42,580 
			 2002 18,264 28,905 24,429 35,070 24.6 22,757 36,016 30,439 43,697 
			 2003 19,227 30,186 25,446 36,405 24.6 23,957 37,612 31,706 45,361 
			 2004 19,803 31,092 26,079 37,368 24.6 24,675 38,741 32,494 46,561 
			 2005 20,397 32,025 26,730 38,358 24.6 25,415 39,903 33,306 47,794 
		
	
	
		
			  Sergeant salaries in England and Wales 
			  September  Non-London minimum salary ()  Non-London maximum salary ()  London minimum salary ()  London maximum salary ()  Employment costs (Percentage)  Total cost (non-London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (non-London) of maximum salary ()  Total cost (London) of minimum salary ()  Total Cost (London) of Maximum Salary () 
			 2001 27,084 31,950 33,195 37,701 24.6 33,747 39,810 41,361 46,975 
			 2002 27,897 32,538 34,062 38,703 24.6 34,760 40,542 42,441 48,224 
			 2003 30,186 33,927 36,405 40,146 24.6 37,612 42,273 45,361 50,022 
			 2004 31,092 34,944 37,368 41,220 24.6 38,741 43,540 46,561 51,360 
			 2005 32,025 35,991 38,358 42,324 24.6 39,903 44,845 47,794 52,736 
		
	
	
		
			  Inspector salaries in England and Wales 
			  September  Non-London minimum salary()  Non-London maximum salary ()  London minimum salary ()  London maximum salary ()  Employment costs (percentage)  Total cost (Non-London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (non-London) of maximum salary ()  Total cost (London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (London) of maximum salary () 
			 2001 35,034 39,153 42,747 45,840 24.6 43,652 48,785 53,263 57,117 
			 2002 36,084 40,329 43,899 48,150 24.6 44,961 50,250 54,698 59,995 
			 2003 38,639 41,952 46,593 49,878 24.6 48,144 52,272 58,055 62,148 
			 2004 39,840 43,212 47,862 51,246 24.6 49,641 53,842 59,636 63,853 
			 2005 41,034 44,508 49,167 52,653 24.6 51,128 55,457 61,262 65,606 
			  Notes:1. South-east England allowance: This was introduced on 1 April 2001 for all officers appointed on or after 1 September 1994 and has been paid since one April 2001 at the following rate:Essex, Herts, Kent, Surrey, Thames Valley?2,000 p.a.Bedfordshire, Hampshire, Sussex?1,000 p.a.2. Officers in all three ranks are eligible for a competence-related threshold payment when they have been at the top of the salary scale for 12 months. This payment was worth 1,002 (2003), 1,032 (2004) and 1,062 (2005).3. Please note the figures in the table do not include the figures above. 
		
	
	
		
			  Probation officer pay in England and Wales 
			   Non-London minimum basic salary ()  Non-London maximum basic salary ()  London weighting ()  London minimum basic salary ()  London maximum basic salary ()  Employment costs (%)  Total cost (not London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (not London) of maximum salary ()  Total cost (London) of minimum salary ()  Total cost (London) of maximum salary () 
			 2001-02 18,786 25,338 2,652 21,438 27,990 22.92 23,092 31,145 26,352 34,405 
			 2002-03 19,443 26,226 2,745 22,188 28,971 22.92 23,899 32,237 27,273 35,611 
			 2003-04 20,257 27,238 3,000 23,257 30,238 22.92 24,900 33,481 28,588 37,169 
			 2004-05 20,804 27,973 3,081 23,885 31,054 22.92 25,572 34,384 29,359 38,172 
			 2005-06 21,324 28,673 3,420 24,744 32,093 22.92 26,211 35,245 30,415 39,449 
			  Notes:1. Salaries quoted are for qualified probation officers and exclude allowances.2. Probation officer pay is determined by national negotiations.3. Spine point range for probation officers is 107-137.4. London weighting added where appropriate.5. Pay in 2001-02 was part of a two year deal from April 2000.6. Employment costs are 22.92 per cent. of salaries.

Prisons

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost of providing  (a) educational facilities,  (b) dental services,  (c) medical services, including costs involved in transporting inmates to and from hospital,  (d) clothing and  (e) food has been in each prison in England and Wales in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Prison Service does not collect information separately on the costs of providing education facilities in English public prisons and the information sought could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Such information is also not available for the Welsh public prisons.
	The Department of Health received 118 million from the Home Office for prison health care costs, including for dentistry, in 2002-03. 139.7 million was spent in 2003-04 and 158 million was spent in 2004-05 on medical and psychiatric care for prisoners in England. The allocation for 2005-06 is 175.7 million. The current comparable amount for health care in the Welsh public prisons is 3,395,000. The cost of providing prisoners with escorts for hospital appointments is not available.
	As the cost of providing clothing is included in the overall figure for prisoners' consumables it is not possible immediately to disaggregate it for the English or Welsh public prisons.
	The cost of food for the public prisons in England was 28,625 million for 2003, 36,807 million for 2003-04 and 38,322 million for 2004-05. The 2005-06 budget for food for the Welsh public prisons is 756,000.
	Comparable information for the contracted prisons is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Probation Service

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many throughcare cases held by the probation service in England and Wales  (a) have not been allocated to a named probation officer and  (b) are held nominally by a senior probation officer.

Gerry Sutcliffe: National Standards 2005 state that:
	GS3Sentenced cases will be allocated to an offender manager.
	SS3.1Following sentence each case will be assigned to a tier within the National Offender Management Model, be recorded as such and will be allocated to an offender manager. The tiering decision will be based on an OASys assessment where available. For offenders sentenced to custody, allocation should be made within five working days of sentence.
	SS3.2Probation areas will ensure that:
	Tier four and tier three cases are allocated within one working day of sentence.
	Tier two and tier one cases are allocated within a maximum of three working days after sentence.
	Requirements which require commencement before three working days are allocated accordingly.
	Data against this national standard are available from October 2005. Between October 2005 and February 2006, 86 per cent. of cases were allocated an offender manager in accordance with national standards. Data by probation area and region showing the proportion of cases in which the standard was met between October 2005 and February 2006 are shown in the following table.
	
		
			  October 2005 to February 2006 
			  Region/area  Percentage of cases meeting the national standard 
			  West Midlands  
			 Staffordshire 89 
			 Warwickshire 100 
			 West Mercia 90 
			 West Midlands 66 
			 West Midlands total 74 
			   
			  North East  
			 County Durham 100 
			 Northumbria 98 
			 Teesside 88 
			 North East total 96 
			   
			  East  
			 Bedfordshire 38 
			 Cambridgeshire 79 
			 Essex  
			 Hertfordshire 89 
			 Norfolk 88 
			 Suffolk 93 
			 East total 80 
			   
			  North West  
			 Cheshire 96 
			 Cumbria 93 
			 Greater Manchester 91 
			 Lancashire 97 
			 Merseyside 97 
			 North West total 94 
			   
			  East Midlands  
			 Derbyshire 90 
			 Leicestershire and Rutland 94 
			 Lincolnshire 100 
			 Nottinghamshire 83 
			 Northamptonshire 90 
			 East Midlands total 92 
			   
			  Yorkshire and Humberside  
			 Humberside 88 
			 North Yorkshire 99 
			 South Yorkshire 94 
			 West Yorkshire 81 
			 Yorkshire and Humberside total 89 
			   
			  South East  
			 Hampshire 91 
			 Kent 95 
			 Surrey 94 
			 Sussex 92 
			 Thames Valley 84 
			 South East total 90 
			   
			  South West  
			 Avon and Somerset 95 
			 Devon/Cornwall 85 
			 Dorset 82 
			 Gloucestershire 77 
			 Wiltshire 100 
			 South West total 88 
			   
			  London  
			 London East 70 
			 London North 67 
			 London South 81 
			 London West 68 
			 London total 72 
			   
			  Wales  
			 Dyfed/Powys 97 
			 Gwent 93 
			 North Wales 90 
			 South Wales 84 
			 Wales total 89 
			   
			 England and Wales 86 
			  Note:CJA orders onlyWas the case allocated to an offender manager within the required time scale, i.e.within one working day of sentence for offenders on tier 3 and tier 4, or who pose a high or very high risk of serious harm to the public, or whose sentence includes a DRR where the first contact will take place within one working day of sentence; orwithin three working days of sentence for tier 1 and tier 2? (SS3.2)

Racial Abuse

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints of racial abuse in his Department have been  (a) investigated and  (b) upheld in each of the last five years.

Liam Byrne: The figures available for the Department are set out in the table at annex A.
	
		
			   Complaints of racial abuse  Up-held 
			 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002 2 1 
			 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2003 0 0 
			 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2004 0 0 
			 1 April 2004 to 31 December 2005 1 0 
			 1 January 2005 to 31 March 2005(1) 8 1 
			 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006(2) 10 1 
			 (1) Data is categorised as three cases of racial harassment, one of which was up-held and five cases of racial discrimination.  (2) Data is categorised as three racial harassment, one of which was up-held and seven racial discrimination includes one which was not up-held and six are still ongoing.

Refugees

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what criteria determine the exclusion of an individual from international protection under the UN Refugee Convention 1951 resulting in that individual receiving temporary admission instead of leave to remain; and if he will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: Article 1F of the Refugee Convention excludes any individual from being a refugee where there are serious reasons for considering that they have: committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity; committed a serious non-political crime prior to arrival in the country of refuge; or been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
	Article 33(2) of the Refugee Convention allows an asylum seeker or recognised refugee to be removed even if they have a well founded fear of persecution where they represent a threat to national security or where having been convicted of a particularly serious crime they constitute a danger to the community, Section 72 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 provides an interpretation of Article 33(2) of the 1951 Convention and defines the term 'particularly serious crime' for the purposes of Article 33(2).

Zimbabwe

Richard Benyon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applicants from Zimbabwe for indefinite leave to remain in the UK under the ancestral visa route have  (a) been refused because their application was proved to be fraudulent and  (b) had their application delayed because of an inquiry into fraud in the last 12 months.

Liam Byrne: In the last 12 months to 30 April 2006, 12 applicants from Zimbabwe for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) under the UK ancestral visa route have been refused. Detailed data which give the reason for the refusals are not held. 87 ILR applicants from Zimbabwe have had their application delayed while inquiries proceed. Of these 77 remain under consideration while documents are checked and other inquiries made.

Access to Work

Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the budget of the access to work scheme for his Department to meet its target of getting one million more disabled people into work over the next 10 years.

Anne McGuire: Access to Work spend has increased from 14.6 million in 1997-98 to 59.5 million in 2004-05 and I am pleased that this programme is now helping some 32,000 disabled people to move into or retain jobs. However, the vast majority of the 2.6 million disabled people who are working do not need the kind of support available from Access to Work.
	We will continue to review the balance between the different types of support and to ensure that the Pathways to Work Pilots continue to achieve impressive results by using a range of provision, including Access to Work, to meet individual need.

Affordable Credit

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on progress on implementation of the Affordable Credit Deductions Scheme.

James Plaskitt: As part of the Government's strategy to increase access to affordable credit for people on low income, we intend to introduce arrangements which, under certain circumstances, will enable lenders to apply for deductions from benefits to repay loans where re-payment arrangements have broken down. We intend to bring forward legislation in the autumn to enable the scheme to come into effect by the end of 2006.

Attendance Allowance

Mark Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will change the attendance allowance qualifying period from six months to three months; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: Attendance allowance provides a contribution towards the extra costs faced by severely disabled people aged 65 or over as a result of long-term disability. The purpose of the six-month qualifying period is to establish that disability and the care needs arising from it are long-term, rather than the result of short-term or transient condition, and we have no plans to change it. However, the decision maker will always look for how long care has been required when a disabled person claims the allowance and will consider whether some or all of the qualifying period has already been completed.

Benefit Claimants

Adrian Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in  (a) Devon and  (b) Torbay claimed (i) income support, (ii) incapacity benefit and (iii) jobseeker's allowance for the most recent month for which figures are available.

James Plaskitt: The available information is in the following table.
	
		
			  Income support, incapacity benefit, severe disablement allowance and jobseeker's allowance claimants in Devon and Torbay; November 2005 
			   Devon  Torbay parliamentary constituency 
			 Income support 17,100 4,400 
			 Incapacity benefit or severe disablement allowance 26,900 5,830 
			 Jobseeker's allowance 5,153 1,458 
			  Notes:1. Income support and incapacity benefit severe disablement allowance figures are rounded to the nearest 10. Jobseeker's allowance figures are un-rounded.2. Incapacity benefit and severe disablement allowance claimant figures include incapacity benefit credits only cases.3. Jobseeker's allowance figures are not seasonally adjusted. Source:Income Support, Incapacity Benefit and Severe Disablement Allowance?DWP Information Directorate, Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study, 100 per cent. data; Jobseeker's Allowance?Count of unemployment-related benefits, Jobcentre Plus computer systems (including clerically held cases).

Car Park Barriers

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps are being taken to prepare guidance on safety for those companies which operate car park barriers.

Anne McGuire: Some guidance on gates and barriers already exists within Health and Safety Executive publications, in particular Workplace Transport Safety, An employers' guide (HSG136). This guidance applies to barriers in car parks and workplaces generally. There is also a British Standard relating to car park barriers.
	In response to recent concerns, HSE will be providing guidance on the safe operation of horizontal swinging barriers through its website within the next week.
	Independent of the concerns regarding car park barriers, a research project has been proposed on the operation and design of retail car parks and delivery areas. The aim of this project, which is subject to approval, is to produce guidance on car park safety including barriers where relevant.

Departmental Staff

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of the staff in his Department is  (a) male,  (b) female and  (c) disabled, broken down by grade.

Anne McGuire: The information is in the following table.
	
		
			  Grade  Percentage male  Percentage female  Percentage declared disabled 
			 SCS 66.54 33.46 3.54 
			 Grade 6/7 56.05 43.95 3.24 
			 SEO/HEO 42.05 57.95 4.97 
			 EO 31.26. 68.74 6.38 
			 AA/AO 28.42 71.59 4.34 
			 Total 30.83 69.17 5.03 
			  Notes:1. Figures are as at 31 December 20052. Figures given are for the Department for Work and Pensions excluding the Health and Safety Executive.3. Figures are rounded to the nearest 0.01 per cent.4. The calculation of percentages is based on the number of people who have declared their disability. There is no requirement for DWP staff to declare their disability.

Disability Benefits

Roberta Blackman-Woods: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the average annual cost to public funds of maintaining a claimant on disability benefits.

Anne McGuire: The available information is in the table.
	
		
			  Disability benefits (disability living allowance, attendance allowance and industrial injuries disablement benefit): (i) estimated average annual amount of benefit paid per recipient( 1) ; and (ii) estimated average annual administrative cost per recipient( 2) 
			  Benefit  Disability living allowance  Attendance allowance  Industrial injuries disablement benefit 
			 Average annual amount paid per recipient () 3,130.00 2,650.00 2,200.00 
			 Average annual administrative cost per recipient () 35.60 8.00 n/a 
			 (1) Figures are for 2005-06 and are rounded to the nearest 10. For disability living allowance they are based on payments data from statistical extracts for 100 per cent. of cases in payment in the quarter to November 2005; for attendance allowance they are based on payments data from statistical extracts for 5 per cent. of cases in payment in the quarter to November 2005; and for industrial injuries disability benefit they are based on payments data from statistical extracts for 100 per cent. of cases in payment in the quarter to September 2005.(2 )Figures are the estimated cost in 2004-05 of maintaining a case where benefit is in payment. They do not include the administrative costs of deciding claims to benefit.

Disability Benefits

Jeremy Hunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what assessment his Department has made of the appropriateness and accessibility of disability living allowance application forms for under 16-year-olds;
	(2)  what progress is being made in simplifying the disability living allowance claim form for under 16-year-olds.

Anne McGuire: The administration of disability living allowance is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Disability and Carers Service, Mr. Terry Moran. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	 Letter from Terry Moran:
	In reply to two of your recent Parliamentary Questions about the Disability Living Allowance claim pack for under 16 year olds, the Minister for Disabled People, Anne McGuire MP, on behalf of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, promised you a substantive reply from the Chief Executive of the Disability and Carers Service.
	You asked what assessment his Department has made of the appropriateness and accessibility of Disability Living Allowance application forms for under 16 year olds and also what progress was being made in simplifying the Disability Living Allowance claim form for under 16 year olds.
	The Department is committed to improving citizens1 accessibility to all its services, including the application forms for Disability Living Allowance for children and adults. The recent launch of on-line electronic claim services for Disability Living Allowance has provided a new option of immediate access through electronic channels for those who prefer that means of making a claim. This option can be used for claims in respect of children.
	The Department, specifically the Disability and Carers Service, continues to work to monitor and improve the Disability Living Allowance claim forms and will continue to take account of the different needs of people with particular disabilities where this is practicable. Consultation about the claim forms is ongoing with the Disability and Carers Service Advisory Forum, which includes representatives of a range of disabled people, this consultation includes the appropriateness and accessibility of the forms.
	I hope this is helpful.

First Aid

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether businesses which are open to the public have a responsibility to provide first aid facilities to customers who are hurt on their premises; what discussions he has had with businesses on this issue; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: The Health and Safety (First-Aid) Regulations 1981 require employers to assess their first aid needs in their workplace for their employees, but not members of the public. However many businesses that provide a service to members of the public will include them in their first aid needs assessment.
	In August 2003, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) consulted industry about extending first aid provision to the public through a discussion document. In September 2004, the Health and Safety Commission concluded that there was already a good voluntary response to the provision of first aid to the public and that changes to the law were not necessary.
	HSE strongly encourages businesses which are open to the public to include the needs of the public and others on their premises when assessing their first-aid needs.

Gershon Review

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what account he took of undertakings made in response to the Gershon review's conclusions on target headcount when making the staffing projections set out on page 154 of his Department's Annual Report for 2006.

Jim Murphy: As set out in the Gershon Review the Department is planning to reduce staff numbers by 30,000 full-time equivalents by the agreed date of 31 March 2008 from a baseline of 132,537 as at 1 March 2004.
	The figures shown in Table 6 of Annex A on page 154 of the departmental report reflect these plans but are presented as average staff numbers over each financial year rather than as an end of year point in time. This is in line with agreed reporting conventions.

Hazardous Substances

Stephen Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent guidance has been issued to the Health and Safety Executive on improving safety standards in the handling of hazardous cargoes at ports and terminals.

Anne McGuire: holding answer 22 May 2006
	The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has not recently issued or received any new guidance on safety standards for handling of hazardous cargoes at ports and terminals.
	The legal and guidance framework that HSE works to in relation to Liquid Natural Gas terminals is set out in the note LNG Terminalsplanning and consent issues, which is available on HSE's website at http://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/supply/ingterminals.pdf.

Pathways to Work

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether he plans to extend the Pathways to Work programme to Greater Manchester.

Jim Murphy: Our successful Pathways to Work pilots have been acknowledged internationally as the best way of helping people on incapacity benefits back into work quickly. They have resulted in 21,400 Pathways job entries, including over 3,360 from voluntary customers.
	Pathways to Work was rolled out in Greater Manchester Central District on 24 April 2006 and is now operational in all sites. The first customers are scheduled for work focussed interviews in week commencing 12 June 2006 Manchester East and Manchester West Districts will form part of the national roll-out of Pathways to Work as set out in the Green PaperA new deal for welfareEmpowering people to work.

Pension Credit Helpline

David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many telephone calls were made to the pension credit helpline in each month from September 2005 to February 2006; how many of these calls  (a) were handled,  (b) received an engaged tone and  (c) were abandoned; and if he will make a statement.

James Purnell: The administration of The Pension Service is a matter for the chief executive, Ms Alexis Cleveland. She will write to the hon. Member.
	 Letter from Alexis Cleveland, dated 25 May 2006:
	You asked the Secretary of State how many calls made to the Pension Credit Application Line in each month from September 2005 to February 2006 were (a) handled (b) engaged (c) abandoned; and if he will make a statement. I have been asked to respond as this matter falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as the Chief Executive of The Pension Service.
	Firstly, please accept my apologies for the delay in response. The table below shows the information, as requested, with additional information covering the period March and April. The number of calls received by the Pension Credit Application Line (PCAL) during November and December 2005 was exceptionally high due to the response to a marketing campaign The Pension Credit Application Line uses an automated filter, the Auto Attendant, when experiencing high volumes of calls. At times when this is required, customers who wish to make a claim for Pension Credit are advised by the Auto Attendant that they will be put through to the call queue. The automated message advises all other callers of the high call volumes and they are given the option to call again (during opening hours) or to contact their local Pension Centre, for which the correct telephone number is provided. When the auto attendant is not operating, callers receive a standard greeting message, during which they may abandon their call (for instance if they have dialled a wrong number).
	
		
			  Month  (i) Inbound calls  (ii) Receiving engaged tone  (iii) Calls filtered to the queue by the auto attendant (when in use)  (iv) Of (iii), Calls abandoned  (v) Of (iii) Calls answered 
			 September 104,181 0 102,879 5,491 102,101 
			 October 523,023 2 131,887 28,940 102,876 
			 November 393,746 0 207,303 55,321 152,159 
			 December 93,885 0 88,422 11,981 76,441 
			 January 202,493 0 139,213 36,837 102,326 
			 February 152,372 0 78,560 3,276 75,186 
			 March 221,421 10 153,422 9,746 143,627 
			 April 132,604 6 89,884 5,029 88,837 
			  Note: There is a discrepancy in the calls answered total due to missing calls. This arises due to a small number of calls not registering on the IT system correctly. 
		
	
	During September 2005 the system that records the number of inbound calls and calls available to be answered did not accurately record data on two days. This resulted in the calls in columns (i) and (iii) to be under recorded, because of missing data.
	In April 2006 we improved the recording process. We can now record the point at which a call is abandoned, of the total 5,029 calls abandoned in April, 1,043 reached the point where they could have been answered i.e. in the adviser queue.
	I hope this information is helpful.

Single Room Rent Restrictions

Natascha Engel: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will commission research into the barriers vulnerable young people face in accessing privately rented shared accommodation at a rent at or below the local single room rent restriction.

James Plaskitt: We published research on the single room rent last year as DWP research report 243 Research into the Single Room Rent Regulations. A copy is available in the Library. There are currently no plans to commission any further research. The current evaluation of the local housing allowance pathfinders in the private rented sector will be completed later this year and will inform our plans for the further reform of housing benefit in the private rented sector.

Television Sets

Jo Swinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many television sets are in operation in the Department  (a) in total,  (b) in Minister's private offices and  (c) in each office building in the Department; and how many television licences are held by the Department.

Anne McGuire: There are 589 television sets in operation in the Department for Work and Pensions of which 12 are in Minister's private offices.
	We are not able to provide an accurate figure on how many television sets are in each office building as the information is not recorded in the format requested. To provide would incur disproportionate cost.
	The Department is covered by 444 television licences.
	In establishing this answer the Department has also consulted the Health and Safety Executive and the Rent Service, both Executive Agencies for which the Department is responsible across the country.

Arm's Length Management Organisations

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many arm's length management organisations which have been inspected have achieved  (a) no stars,  (b) one star,  (c) two stars and  (d) three stars.

Yvette Cooper: 45 arms length management organisations have had at least one inspection. Based on the most recent inspection for each of those ALMOs, one has achieved no stars, five have achieved one star, 29 have achieved two stars and 10 have achieved three stars.

Arm's Length Management Organisations

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many applications she has received from councils to set up  (a) stock-transfers and  (b) arm's length management organisations in the next round.

Yvette Cooper: We have yet to invite applications. We will opening the bidding round shortly.

Arm's Length Management Organisations

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will list transfers to arm's length management organisations since 1999; and what the estimated value is of each item of stock.

Yvette Cooper: Local authorities do not transfer their housing stock to arm's length management organisations (ALMOs). The stock and the ALMO remain wholly owned by the local authorities. ALMOs are set up by local authorities to manage all or part of their housing stock.
	The ALMO programme has been running since 2001-02. Since then, 57 local authorities have transferred their housing management functions to an arm's length management organisation (ALMO). They are listed as follows. Because this is a management contract between the ALMO and the local authority, the Department of Communities and Local Government does not estimate the value of the individual items of housing stock.
	 Arm's length management organisations:
	 Local authority:
	 ALMO round 1?announced 29 November 2001
	Ashfield
	Derby
	Hounslow
	Kirklees
	Rochdale
	Stockton-on-Tees
	Westminster
	Wigan
	 ALMO round 2?announced 29 May 2002
	Barnsley
	Blyth Valley
	Bolton
	Brent
	Carrick
	Cheltenham
	Colchester
	Hillingdon
	Kensington and Chelsea
	Leeds?East
	Leeds?North East
	Leeds?North West
	Leeds?South
	Leeds?South East
	Leeds?West
	Oldham
	Salford (withdrawn)
	Waltham Forest (withdrawn)
	 ALMO round 3?announced 28 July 2003
	Barnet
	Camden (withdrawn)
	Easington
	Gateshead
	Harrow (withdrawn)
	High Peak
	Islington
	Newcastle
	Poole
	Sheffield (partial)
	Solihull
	South Lakeland
	Warrington
	 ALMO round 4?announced on 5 May 2004
	Bassetlaw
	Brent (partial)
	Bury
	Ealing
	Eastbourne
	Hammersmith and Fulham
	Manchester (partial)
	Newark and Sherwood
	Nottingham
	Rotherham
	Sandwell
	Sheffield (partial)
	Slough
	Wolverhampton
	 ALMO round 5?announced on 23 June 2005
	Doncaster
	Gloucester
	Hackney
	Lambeth (partial)
	Newham
	Sheffield (partial)
	South Tyneside
	Southend
	Stockport
	Wear Valley

Cabinet Committees

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many Cabinet committees he will be chairing in his new role; and how frequently he expects them to meet.

David Gauke: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  how many Cabinet committees he is scheduled to chair in the week commencing  (a) 15 May,  (b) 22 May and  (c) 29 May;
	(2)  which Cabinet committees he chairs; and how frequently each such committee has met in the past month.

Theresa May: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the Cabinet committees he chairs; and which he chaired at 10 April 2006.

Hilary Armstrong: holding answer 11 May 2006
	I have been asked to reply.
	My right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister, has asked my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister to chair nine Cabinet Committees and to act as his deputy on a further seven Committees. An updated list of all Cabinet Committees, and of who chairs them, was placed in the Library by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 17 May 2006. Previous lists contain information on the number of Committees chaired by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister prior to that date. Information relating to the proceedings of Cabinet Committees, including when and how often they meet, is generally not disclosed as to do so could harm the frankness and candour of internal discussion.

Departmental Responsibilities

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will list responsibilities which her Department and its predecessors have lost since 1997; what the  (a) date and  (b) destination Department was in each case; what responsibilities the Department and its predecessors have taken on since 1997; and what the (i) date and (ii) source Department was in each case.

Angela Smith: holding answer 15 May 2006
	Ministerial responsibilities are set out in the 'List of Ministerial Responsibilities', which is updated regularly. A revised version will be published shortly. Copies of previous versions are available in the Library.

Electromagnetic Fields

Mark Tami: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what  (a) guidance she issues and  (b) restrictions she places on electricity companies on the siting of electricity sub-stations in areas of high population density.

Yvette Cooper: New substations or major extensions to existing substations may require planning permission from local planning authorities. However, the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 does allow certain development to take place within existing substations and on operational land without the need to apply for planning permission.
	The Secretary of State has not issued any guidelines to electricity companies on the siting of electricity sub-stations.

Flood Plains

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what action he plans to take against those councils ignoring advice from the Environment Agency not to build on flood plains.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	Local authorities are responsible for the planning decisions they take. They must take all relevant factors into account to strike an appropriate balance between the needs of the local community and flood risk, and can be challenged in the courts on whether they have exercised their judgment in a lawful manner. The Environment Agency has succeeded in a judicial review, where it considered an authority had not given sufficient weight to its views of flood risk in a planning decision. To support authorities in making these decisions the Government recently consulted on a package of measures to strengthen the application of planning policy for development and flood risk. Responding to figures in the Environment Agency's High Level Target 5 report for 2004-05, published in February, on permissions for major development permitted against its sustained objection on flood risk grounds, my officials have contacted the authorities about whose cases the Agency still had concerns, and we are currently seeking the Agency's views on the authorities detailed responses.

Home Ownership

Shona McIsaac: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what percentage of people in each electoral ward in  (a) Cleethorpes,  (b) Great Grimsby,  (c) Scunthorpe and  (d) Brigg and Goole constituencies own their own homes.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	The following data are derived from the 2001 Census, and show the percentage of households that own their own home in each ward.
	
		
			  (a) Cleethorpes 
			  Ward  Percentage 
			 Barton 73 
			 Croft Baker 67 
			 Ferry 79 
			 Haverstoe 88 
			 Humberston and New Waltham 91 
			 Immingham 72 
			 Sidney Sussex 74 
			 Waltham 86 
			 Wolds 87 
		
	
	
		
			  (b) Great Grimsby 
			  Ward  Percentage 
			 East Marsh 42 
			 Freshney 75 
			 Heneage 76 
			 Park 77 
			 Scartho 88 
			 South 48 
			 West Marsh 62 
			 Yarborough 77 
		
	
	
		
			  (c) Scunthorpe 
			  Ward  Percentage 
			 Ashby 68 
			 Bottesford 93 
			 Brumby 53 
			 Crosby and Park 64 
			 Frodingham 59 
			 Kingsway with Lincoln Gardens 72 
			 Ridge 78 
			 Town 61 
		
	
	
		
			  (d) Brigg and Goole 
			  Ward  Percentage 
			 Axholme Central 81 
			 Axholme North 73 
			 Axholme South 85 
			 Brigg and Wolds 72 
			 Broughton and Appleby 81 
			 Burringham and Gunness 71 
			 Burton upon Slather and Winterton 81 
			 Goole North 75 
			 Goole South 64 
			 Ridge 80 
			 Snaith, Airmyn, Rawcliffe and Marshland 80

Homelessness

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what action the Government are taking to reduce homelessness, with particular reference to Greater London.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	Our strategy Sustainable Communities: settled homes; changing lives sets out our aims to reduce homelessness and halve the number of households in temporary accommodation by 2010.
	We are working with London boroughs, Government office for London, the Greater London Authority, Association of Local Government and other organisations in London to deliver the strategy and further reduce levels of rough sleeping in the capital.

Homelessness

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what funds his Department has allocated to reducing homelessness in each of the last eight years.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	The following table shows the amounts of grant that were allocated by ODPM to local authorities and voluntary organisations in England in each of the last eight years for reducing homelessness.
	
		
			   million 
			   Local authorities  Voluntary organisations  Total 
			 2005-06 44.5 15.0 59.5 
			 2004-05 45.8 14.8 60.6 
			 2003-04 50.6 20.3 70.9 
			 2002-03 48.2 25.0 73.2 
			 2001-02 3.5 36.6 40.1 
			 2000-01 2.9 28.6 31.5 
			 1999-2000 3.1 22.6 25.7 
			 1998-99 0.00 19.6 19.6 
			 Total 198.6 182.5 381.1

Homelessness

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what recent estimate she has made of the number of black and minority ethnic young people who are homeless.

Yvette Cooper: This specific information is not collected centrally and no estimates are currently available.
	In 2005, there were some 20,700 identified black and minority ethnic households accepted as homeless and in a priority need category (21 per cent. of all accepted households), but a corresponding breakdown by age is not available. In the same period there were nearly 9,000 households consisting of young people in priority need?that is, those aged 16 or 17, or those care-leavers aged under 21 (9 per cent. of all accepted households)?but a corresponding breakdown by ethnicity is not available.
	Recognising the disproportionate risk of homelessness for ethnic minorities, ODPM commissioned research in 2003 to find out more about the causes of statutory homelessness among these households in England. Findings were published last September, and at the same time a 3 million Ethnic Minorities Innovation Fund was launched to provide money for new, innovative projects to reduce and prevent homelessness among ethnic minority communities and to support the delivery of good practice more widely.

Housing

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the Answer of 15 May 2006,  Official Report, column 805W, on housing, what the average subsidy was to a key worker in  (a) Barnet and  (b) London in each employment sector under (i) the Starter Home Initiative and (ii) Key Worker Living between 2004 and 2006; what the total cost was of each scheme in  (A) Barnet and  (B) London in that period, broken down by employment sector; and if she will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: The Starter Home Initiative (SHI) was delivered mainly through equity loans. Table 1 details the total and average subsidy provided by employment sector under SHI in Barnet and across London between 2001-02 and 2003-04.
	
		
			  Starter Home Initiative 
			  Key worker  Average subsidy ()  Total Social Housing Grant ()  Units 
			  Barnet
			 Health 38,226 1,681,950 44 
			 Teachers 34,686 2,011,800 58 
			 Police 31,507 472,600 15 
			 Others 24,600 24,600 1 
			 Total 35,517 4,190,950 118 
			  
			  London
			 Health 34,411 62,661,804 1821 
			 Teachers 33,911 47,508,727 1401 
			 Police 35,776 23,683,665 662 
			 Others 40,009 6,681,456 167 
			 Total 34,692 140,535,652 4051 
		
	
	Key Worker Living (KWL) funding is divided between Open Market HomeBuy (equity loans) and new build products such as shared ownership and intermediate rent. For new build products it is not possible to provide average subsidy by sector. Table 2 details the total and average subsidy provided by employment sector under KWL Open Market HomeBuy in Barnet and across London between 2004-05 and 2005-06. 40 million has so far been provided in London to provide 932 units. None of these units have been developed in Barnet.
	
		
			  Key Worker Living Open Market HomeBuy 
			  Key worker  Average subsidy ()  Total Social Housing Grant ()  Units 
			  Barnet
			 Health 35,975 935,337 26 
			 Education 44,697 1,385,620 31 
			 Police 35,367 247,570 7 
			 Prison 38,300 76,600 2 
			 Probation 45,700 45,700 1 
			 Local Authority 40,003 160,011 4 
			 Total 40,153 2,850,838 71 
			 London Challenge Teachers 87,981 2,287,505 26 
			  
			  London
			 Health 40,751 51,142,055 1,255 
			 Education 42,321 51,631,570 1,220 
			 Police 41,728 25,245,176 605 
			 Prison 44,828 3,541,398 79 
			 Probation 46,800 1,450,787 31 
			 Local Authority 41,681 5,043,434 121 
			 Total 41,696 138,054,420 3,311 
			 London Challenge Teachers 87,751 73,710,560 840 
		
	
	Teachers who qualify for London Challenge Teacher funding can receive up to 100,000 as an equity loan instead of 50,000 for all other key workers which is why the average subsidy per unit is higher for this group.

Housing

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many new homes have been built in Taunton constituency in each year since 1997.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	The number of new house building completions in Taunton Deane local authority district, as reported by the local authority and the National House-Building Council are tabled as follows. Figures are not collected by constituency.
	
		
			   New house building completions 
			 1997 377 
			 1998 323 
			 1999 659 
			 2000 532 
			 2001 532 
			 2002 462 
			 2003 262 
			 2004 317 
			 2005 276 
			  Source:  Building control completionslocal authority and National House-Building Council

Housing

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what plans she has to increase the supply of affordable housing in Bolton.

Yvette Cooper: The housing corporation's 2006-08 programme allocates 4,883,609 in for social housing schemes in Bolton. This contrasts with 961,694 in 2004-06. In addition, Bolton's unitary development plan states that the council will negotiate with developers to provide an element of affordable houses in new schemes.

Housing

Mark Harper: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister under what circumstances a member of the armed forces is considered to have local connections for the purposes of obtaining social housing on discharge.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 6 March 2006
	I have been asked to reply.
	The allocation legislation (part 6 of the Housing Act 1996) allows, but does not require, local authorities to take into account whether a person has a local connection with the district in determining priorities between applicants for social housing. For these purposes local connection is defined by s.199 of the 1996 Act which provides that a local connection may be established through residence of choice (either now or in the past), employment, family associations or special circumstances. However, s.199 provides that:
	a person is not employed in the district if he is serving in the armed forces there, and
	residence in a district is not of a person's choice if he (or someone he lives with) is serving in the armed forces there.
	This is intended to safeguard local authorities in areas with large military bases.
	We are reviewing the position with the Ministry of Defence.

Housing

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the total income was of the local authority housing revenue account in each authority in England that retains its own council housing, in the last period for which figures are available; how much of that was  (a) spent on repairs and administration of council housing , (b) used for other purposes by councils and  (c) taken by central Government for (i) redistribution and (ii) debt repayment.

Phil Woolas: I have been asked to reply.
	The following table shows 2004-05 total income, management and maintenance expenditure, other expenditure (within the housing revenue account), subsidy paid to the authority and 'negative subsidy' (i.e. amounts paid by the authority to Government) and total expenditure in 2004-05 for each of the 235 housing revenue accounts which were open on 1 April 2005.
	The 'negative subsidy' payments made by authorities to Government are used to help fund the subsidy payments required by authorities with deficits. In total the subsidies paid to authorities exceeded the amount paid to Government by some 75 million.
	
		
			  Housing revenue accounts' income and expenditure 2004-05 
			   
			   Total income  Management and maintenance expenditure  Other expenditure  Negative subsidy transfer to ODPM  Total expenditure 
			 Adur 10,709,903 4,540,349 3,629,680 1,420,820 9,590,849 
			 Alnwick 5,487,685 2,182,816 2,186,437 682,119 5,051,372 
			 Arun 16,068,106 7,994,196 2,769,205 1,996,982 12,760,383 
			 Ashfield 24,261,830 10,253,960 9,853,357 0 20,107,317 
			 Ashford 19,864,820 7,779,746 7,099,753 4,465,918 19,345,417 
			 Aylesbury 43,143,906 11,135,660 21,656,649 9,700,287 42,492,596 
			 Babergh 14,671,857 5,231,058 4,428,781 3,439,353 13,099,192 
			 Barking 72,765,930 39,595,830 22,589,129 7,406,543 69,591,502 
			 Barnet 56,519,588 28,669,215 14,420,601 7,489,375 50,579,191 
			 Barnsley 57,493,804 26,166,536 22,711,720 0 48,878,256 
			 Barrow 9,444,202 4,481,935 2,736,983 501,300 7,720,218 
			 Basildon 45,069,926 21,067,071 22,338,404 0 43,405,475 
			 Bassetlaw 20,787,004 11,301,261 8,126,174 1,846,916 21,274,351 
			 Berwick 5,730,791 2,115,059 1,472,711 1,652,799 5,240,569 
			 Birmingham 226,699,616 120,326,014 89,491,302 0 209,817,316 
			 Blaby 6,948,641 3,015,387 2,053,299 1,656,434 6,725,120 
			 Blackpool 16,666,219 10,315,570 5,777,605 0 16,093,175 
			 Blyth Valley 15,781,373 8,187,967 6,781,975 0 14,969,942 
			 Bolsover 12,903,299 5,620,836 3,549,539 2,858,369 12,028,744 
			 Bolton 49,251,100 25,069,100 22,273,500 0 47,342,600 
			 Bournemouth 17,856,891 6,566,842 5,368,973 2,839,879 14,775,694 
			 Bracknell 28,246,815 10,015,594 8,979,659 8,066,322 27,061,575 
			 Braintree 33,292,786 11,937,776 8,622,355 7,114,686 27,674,817 
			 Brent 66,620,000 22,609,000 43,498,000 0 66,107,000 
			 Brentwood 13,437,000 4,653,000 5,149,000 2,862,000 12,664,000 
			 Bridgnorth 10,549,870 3,359,342 4,381,247 2,396,190 10,136,779 
			 Brighton and Hove 49,269,825 21,931,175 23,995,907 0 45,927,082 
			 Bristol 129,541,558 45,493,253 43,224,311 18,823,646 107,541,210 
			 Bromsgrove 395,955 39,371 0 0 39,371 
			 Broxbourne 15,180,389 7,323,508 2,865,861 4,006,115 14,195,484 
			 Broxtowe 16,046,235 5,897,303 7,423,486 0 13,320,789 
			 Bury 27,403,844 13,372,327 6,968,325 3,363,230 23,703,882 
			 Cambridge 37,780,888 10,791,761 9,387,053 8,904,930 29,083,744 
			 Camden 233,419,645 87,888,459 65,269,265 0 153,157,724 
			 Cannock Chase 16,557,215 6,561,881 7,174,584 1,952,602 15,689,067 
			 Canterbury 18,262,974 8,165,087 6,251,568 3,179,832 17,596,487 
			 Caradon 11,408,404 5,435,089 2,905,544 2,379,755 10,720,388 
			 Carrick 12,461,824 5,650,300 26,368,733 1,445,988 33,465,021 
			 Castle Morpeth 5,910,405 2,864,520 5,679,424 756,469 9,300,413 
			 Castle Point 6,908,515 3,170,329 1,751,962 1,495,731 6,418,022 
			 Charnwood 19,175,208 8,192,334 10,283,657 0 18,475,991 
			 Cheltenham 16,933,685 8,388,797 4,573,445 2,445,940 15,408,182 
			 Chester-le-St 13,495,420 5,085,111 5,475,628 1,857,906 12,418,645 
			 Chesterfield 28,618,246 12,818,503 9,040,318 3,557,636 25,416,457 
			 Chorley 7,682,611 3,533,083 2,244,185 1,462,495 7,239,763 
			 City of London 18,211,506 9,591,091 2,805,492 12,745 12,409,328 
			 City of York 31,547,171 11,147,416 10,535,439 5,009,616 26,692,471 
			 Colchester 24,745,271 10,492,447 10,545,946 1,069,049 22,107,442 
			 Copeland 1,994,430 947,226 506,719 400,838 1,854,783 
			 Corby 16,476,937 8,581,592 3,419,782 0 12,001,374 
			 Crawley 39,383,187 14,389,445 11,332,835 10,726,401 36,448,681 
			 Croydon 61,230,161 29,246,142 18,611,540 9,075,638 56,933,320 
			 Dacorum 49,623,620 14,436,434 15,453,801 17,813,382 47,703,617 
			 Darlington 14,965,981 8,189,387 5,099,150 1,200,235 14,488,772 
			 Dartford 25,668,196 7,238,652 13,385,340 4,117,318 24,741,310 
			 Daventry 10,050,493 3,109,466 3,187,782 3,219,500 9,516,748 
			 Derby 49,391,575 22,522,189 20,377,597 0 42,899,786 
			 Derwentside 23,852,996 8,999,713 12,366,163 1,293,483 22,659,359 
			 Doncaster 57,860,273 30,403,420 18,799,608 2,693,262 51,896,290 
			 Dover 19,895,207 7,252,741 4,144,279 3,835,156 15,232,176 
			 Dudley 69,759,710 34,175,588 20,430,569 12,309,260 66,915,417 
			 Durham 15,934,506 7,561,981 6,133,260 0 13,695,241 
			 Ealing 79,204,400 41,928,500 46,633,500 0 88,562,000 
			 Easington 34,683,000 12,835,000 18,773,000 694,000 32,302,000 
			 East Devon 10,986,312 4,305,367 2,589,990 4,090,955 10,986,312 
			 East Riding 35,140,034 13,622,820 8,722,952 8,713,411 31,059,183 
			 Eastbourne 14,025,183 5,937,297 6,307,913 0 12,245,210 
			 Ellesmere Port 14,592,817 6,591,530 4,425,957 2,237,007 13,254,494 
			 Enfield 56,294,897 29,716,003 18,499,285 0 48,215,288 
			 Epping Forest 32,904,447 10,860,629 9,653,467 7,556,081 28,070,177 
			 Exeter 15,285,259 6,350,578 2,982,059 3,554,695 12,887,332 
			 Fareham 10,068,575 4,900,946 3,103,860 919,660 8,924,466 
			 Fenland 12,633,476 5,299,232 4,604,791 1,958,699 11,862,722 
			 Forest Heath 5,199,926 2,048,209 1,599,897 1,205,576 4,853,682 
			 Gateshead 70,600,637 31,234,000 34,671,000 3,172,000 69,077,000 
			 Gedling 12,290,304 4,703,686 3,040,079 3,741,871 11,485,636 
			 Gloucester 14,631,110 8,272,700 4,223,176 710,086 13,205,962 
			 Gosport 10,558,660 4,744,005 2,773,679 1,960,090 9,477,774 
			 Gravesham 21,092,834 10,728,285 4,899,691 3,770,223 19,398,199 
			 Great Yarmouth 16,740,208 8,696,931 4,972,397 1,286,410 14,955,738 
			 Greenwich 132,558,902 59,778,039 54,112,308 0 113,890,347 
			 Guildford 30,497,585 9,697,541 12,471,474 7,228,570 29,397,585 
			 Hackney 170,085,289 80,851,838 68,305,190 0 149,157,028 
			 Halton 17,310,218 8,873,186 4,852,142 3,146,023 16,871,351 
			 Hammersmith 101,762,286 68,285,330 29,302,239 0 97,587,569 
			 Harborough 8,439,067 3,121,400 1,789,540 2,694,708 7,605,648 
			 Haringey 105,107,200 50,042,000 48,106,400 0 98,148,400 
			 Harlow 82,919,410 15,578,669 56,850,566 8,792,697 81,221,932 
			 Harrogate 13,544,129 6,056,406 2,814,288 2,203,008 11,073,702 
			 Harrow 22,329,594 11,930,388 5,594,857 4,108,267 21,633,512 
			 Havering 39,498,994 19,756,576 11,148,608 6,066,145 36,971,329 
			 High Peak 13,012,873 6,442,181 3,417,941 2,139,703 11,999,825 
			 Hillingdon 62,140,447 22,872,135 18,087,651 8,167,650 49,127,436 
			 Hinckley 11,648,172 4,364,867 3,721,105 2,646,829 10,732,801 
			 Hounslow 65,609,883 38,229,721 24,769,208 0 62,998,929 
			 Hyndburn 8,573,248 4,623,582 3,802,164 0 8,425,746 
			 Ipswich 29,646,176 9,352,156 11,517,375 4,273,645 25,143,176 
			 Isles of Scilly 410,326 153,499 97,160 38,563 289,222 
			 Islington 206,596,548 71,932,690 126,522,823 0 198,455,513 
			 Kensington 49,556,978 28,170,252 18,688,484 0 46,858,736 
			 Kettering 10,714,243 5,783,360 2,561,109 1,846,413 10,190,882 
			 Kings Lynn 19,355,424 10,245,215 5,437,438 0 15,682,653 
			 Kingston Upon Hull 87,278,467 36,972,225 33,601,475 0 70,573,700 
			 Kingston upon Thames 24,758,311 14,199,849 5,820,683 4,033,000 24,053,532 
			 Kirklees 85,732,651 34,447,340 25,347,067 0 59,794,407 
			 Lambeth 213,975,000 97,331,000 115,123,000 0 212,454,000 
			 Lancaster 12,174,132 5,770,639 4,615,296 755,195 11,141,130 
			 Leeds 169,485,007 90,488,414 74,390,737 0 164,879,151 
			 Leicester 65,674,168 37,199,380 23,979,926 0 61,179,306 
			 Lewes 13,086,201 4,875,978 4,357,766 1,473,836 10,707,580 
			 Lewisham 160,840,000 73,084,000 79,582,000 0 152,666,000 
			 Lincoln 21,738,044 11,699,227 8,389,761 0 20,088,988 
			 Liverpool 92,330,442 32,729,060 58,055,992 0 90,785,052 
			 Luton 31,560,316 16,380,223 8,392,874 3,414,488 28,187,585 
			 Macclesfield 15,964,501 7,653,705 3,301,134 4,371,187 15,326,026 
			 Manchester 225,312,372 96,967,450 120,550,462 0 217,517,912 
			 Mansfield 24,157,447 15,589,534 7,656,913 0 23,246,447 
			 Medway Towns 10,647,518 4,968,319 6,033,402 851,823 11,853,544 
			 Melton 5,431,867 2,620,031 1,608,763 1,037,454 5,266,248 
			 Merton 29,703,598 17,397,924 7,716,917 3,850,186 28,965,027 
			 Mid Devon 9,857,736 4,212,369 1,846,333 3,032,217 9,090,919 
			 Mid Suffolk 11,601,909 4,781,279 3,806,362 2,408,883 10,996,524 
			 Middlesbrough 26,192,000 12,836,000 10,315,000 856,000 24,007,000 
			 Milton Keynes 50,492,291 16,698,613 15,519,531 12,295,205 44,513,349 
			 Mole Valley 14,327,281 7,321,679 2,784,127 2,383,029 12,488,835 
			 NE Derbyshire 23,700,163 9,144,675 7,209,372 3,964,515 20,318,562 
			 New Forest 22,105,416 8,428,675 4,754,066 5,317,744 18,500,485 
			 Newark 15,986,034 7,057,456 5,451,817 1,596,510 14,105,783 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 128,251,445 57,543,579 65,526,797 0 123,070,376 
			 Newham 149,383,758 52,699,085 85,147,220 0 137,846,305 
			 North Cornwall 10,571,455 4,953,310 2,328,866 2,324,194 9,606,370 
			 North East Lincoln 19,912,557 8,710,538 9,303,527 527,136 18,541,201 
			 North Kesteven 10,822,584 4,849,643 3,985,580 1,330,224 10,165,447 
			 North Lincoln 25,477,289 12,582,779 11,072,855 1,698,178 25,353,812 
			 North Norfolk 13,480,702 5,503,367 3,804,285 3,377,034 12,684,686 
			 North Shropshire 6,568,503 2,438,425 1,550,990 1,893,862 5,883,277 
			 North Somerset 24,699,436 9,989,753 6,186,631 4,469,715 20,646,099 
			 North Tyneside 60,040,787 22,501,166 28,958,687 262,377 51,722,230 
			 North Warwick 8,952,654 2,989,189 2,242,474 3,081,673 8,313,336 
			 Northampton 44,227,922 18,429,800 14,139,299 8,104,127 40,673,226 
			 Norwich 56,774,944 25,216,273 19,996,425 5,838,249 51,050,947 
			 Nottingham 87,098,378 50,348,926 35,165,944 0 85,514,870 
			 Nuneaton 22,619,699 9,369,200 4,586,512 6,634,828 20,590,540 
			 NW Leicester 12,760,932 5,422,406 3,212,473 3,309,089 11,943,968 
			 Oadby and Wigston 4,406,546 1,557,215 1,463,240 748,013 3,768,468 
			 Oldham 52,504,742 25,828,260 25,143,051 318,714 51,290,025 
			 Oswestry 5,574,293 2,807,817 1,442,326 943,658 5,193,801 
			 Oxford City 43,156,569 12,344,275 19,629,743 6,579,835 38,553,853 
			 Pendle 10,530,316 4,205,179 3,081,361 1,178,541 8,465,081 
			 Peterborough 16,686,768 10,618,936 3,328,304 998,322 14,945,562 
			 Plymouth 49,109,754 24,645,234 22,756,767 0 47,402,001 
			 Poole 15,851,000 7,375,000 3,560,000 3,822,000 14,757,000 
			 Portsmouth 66,023,901 30,210,917 31,135,379 0 61,346,296 
			 Preston 17,950,046 10,373,038 6,969,870 0 17,342,908 
			 Purbeck 2,040,932 866,941 249,573 690,599 1,807,113 
			 Reading 40,266,153 19,350,229 9,365,834 8,923,020 37,639,083 
			 Redbridge 22,113,000 12,352,000 5,188,000 2,362,000 19,902,000 
			 Redcar and Clev 344,039 4,056 374,030 0 378,086 
			 Redditch 17,648,518 7,677,884 5,095,323 4,629,875 17,403,082 
			 Ribble Valley 3,979,899 1,520,408 1,612,080 527,104 3,659,592 
			 Richmondshire 5,191,752 2,584,320 1,179,490 1,027,942 4,791,752 
			 Rochdale 51,495,825 24,701,409 21,753,616 0 46,455,025 
			 Rochford 6,448,857 2,823,420 2,175,712 476,357 5,475,489 
			 Rossendale 10,304,073 4,959,254 4,010,065 964,742 9,934,061 
			 Rotherham 75,736,087 28,549,508 24,271,239 16,645,054 69,465,801 
			 Rugby 12,092,460 4,980,310 4,916,090 2,206,600 12,103,000 
			 Runnymede 14,838,508 4,459,378 7,595,502 0 12,054,880 
			 Rutland 4,231,926 2,078,662 1,015,456 980,593 4,074,711 
			 Salford 91,014,388 47,183,931 39,858,465 0 87,042,396 
			 Salisbury 29,561,686 7,783,113 12,321,836 5,784,745 25,889,694 
			 Sandwell 107,157 64,307 28,640 1,683 94,630 
			 Sedgefield 26,921,982 12,805,518 7,330,176 3,325,992 23,461,686 
			 Sedgemoor 15,282,681 8,674,989 2,688,843 2,818,635 14,182,467 
			 Sefton 43,122,693 18,953,119 11,715,804 10,318,498 40,987,421 
			 Selby 11,906,751 4,014,268 4,513,093 2,652,500 11,179,861 
			 Sheffield 151,540,511 78,612,175 68,139,302 0 146,751,477 
			 Shepway 17,117,000 6,546,000 6,784,000 1,531,000 14,861,000 
			 Slough 28,721,633 12,720,109 6,173,936 5,142,952 24,036,997 
			 Solihull 48,602,744 17,973,237 21,814,090 3,848,852 43,636,179 
			 South Beds 20,013,435 7,778,562 5,282,639 6,111,676 19,172,877 
			 South Cambridge 22,741,446 8,265,942 3,677,469 8,741,944 20,685,355 
			 South Derby 10,513,763 4,333,961 2,974,743 1,854,139 9,162,843 
			 South Gloucs 37,262,465 12,051,315 17,011,933 6,452,032 35,515,280 
			 South Holland 12,338,154 5,555,341 2,674,802 2,265,203 10,495,346 
			 South Kesteven 22,655,682 8,973,468 10,369,589 0 19,343,057 
			 South Lakeland 11,639,894 5,307,981 2,948,693 3,560,276 11,816,950 
			 South Norfolk 179,678 0 138,836 0 138,836 
			 South Northants 11,378,162 3,804,735 2,819,133 3,738,059 10,361,927 
			 South Tyneside 54,948,633 22,094,672 25,855,895 3,600,720 51,551,287 
			 Southampton 51,316,118 26,503,926 22,871,262 0 49,375,188 
			 Southend-on-Sea 33,123,000 13,679,864 6,808,000 309,136 20,797,000 
			 Southwark 311,200,000 151,587,000 132,083,000 0 283,670,000 
			 St. Albans 21,610,336 7,678,453 6,169,509 7,029,484 20,877,446 
			 Stafford 16,011,212 8,655,544 4,353,212 2,484,817 15,493,573 
			 Stevenage 34,431,181 12,518,614 7,438,732 12,235,893 32,193,239 
			 Stockport 33,596,180 18,350,704 39,198,854 602,302 58,151,860 
			 Stockton 33,090,997 15,314,313 16,570,261 0 31,884,574 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 51,593,233 25,285,238 19,811,262 4,429,212 49,525,712 
			 Stroud 21,583,127 7,321,894 6,867,120 4,843,028 19,032,042 
			 Sutton 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Swindon 35,028,510 15,851,560 10,527,468 6,430,831 32,809,859 
			 Tamworth 15,213,387 8,162,560 5,049,726 1,201,696 14,413,982 
			 Tandridge 13,127,073 4,390,262 5,849,388 2,635,997 12,875,647 
			 Taunton Deane 19,588,250 8,570,298 4,468,113 4,264,208 17,302,619 
			 Teesdale 2,382,715 1,195,357 675,438 315,134 2,185,929 
			 Tendring 12,439,331 4,863,400 4,341,077 770,093 9,974,570 
			 Thanet 9,634,347 5,743,408 3,476,242 58,609 9,278,259 
			 Three Rivers 18,058,061 6,471,753 4,855,684 4,508,252 15,835,689 
			 Thurrock 36,834,300 18,093,000 9,491,200 5,810,800 33,395,000 
			 Torridge 5,817,680 2,262,512 1,609,458 1,071,209 4,943,179 
			 Tower Hamlets 164,285,136 87,233,780 70,031,347 0 157,265,127 
			 Trafford 34,523,270 14,929,073 6,926,421 9,053,487 30,908,981 
			 Uttlesford 19,527,000 3,508,000 11,755,000 3,764,000 19,027,000 
			 Wakefield 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Waltham Forest 67,793,005 21,553,808 44,808,614 0 66,362,422 
			 Wandsworth 95,162,697 55,211,256 25,554,763 0 80,766,019 
			 Wansbeck 13,575,630 10,496,776 1,193,764 0 11,690,540 
			 Warrington 24,867,651 11,347,326 7,531,627 4,991,123 23,870,076 
			 Warwick 19,490,073 7,222,075 6,581,657 4,484,211 18,287,943 
			 Watford 18,758,657 7,814,753 4,781,339 5,114,334 17,710,426 
			 Waveney 17,060,277 6,167,771 4,396,590 4,896,479 15,460,840 
			 Waverley 21,181,551 7,549,570 5,463,808 6,962,900 19,976,278 
			 Wealden 11,272,572 4,468,994 4,044,549 1,361,164 9,874,707 
			 Wear Valley 11,375,000 4,840,000 5,241,000 733,000 10,814,000 
			 Wellingborough 13,975,554 5,191,404 5,138,239 2,637,778 12,967,421 
			 Welwyn Hatfield 38,836,709 14,791,694 8,393,369 10,559,546 33,744,609 
			 West Lancashire 19,586,814 10,524,020 14,068,190 3,481,348 28,073,558 
			 Westminster 115,747,320 48,956,500 90,427,321 0 139,383,821 
			 Wigan 73,653,815 28,099,727 34,785,931 0 62,885,658 
			 Winchester 20,227,402 9,278,713 4,299,768 5,703,174 19,281,655 
			 Wirral 35,758,000 16,236,000 11,084,000 2,906,000 30,226,000 
			 Woking 14,438,267 7,316,384 3,561,177 3,033,756 13,911,317 
			 Wokingham 11,227,592 4,510,530 5,970,998 0 10,481,528 
			 Wolverhampton 70,194,558 42,351,194 24,329,068 0 66,680,262 
			 Wycombe 26,335,966 10,212,008 6,216,598 8,319,558 24,748,164

Housing

Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what allocations have been made to registered social landlords who provide housing specifically for black and minority ethnic people in Luton in each of the last five years.

Yvette Cooper: The following table shows the allocations made in Luton to black, minority and ethnic (BME) registered social landlords (RSLs) through the Housing Corporation's Affordable Housing Programme (AHP) and Local Authority Social Housing Grant (LASHG) in each year from 2001-02 to 2005-06.
	
		
			   
			   ADP  LASHG 
			   Direct  Indirect  Direct  Indirect 
			 2001-02 691,385 514,754 0 0 
			 2002-03 0 0 252,828 0 
			 2003-04 9,532,440 0 0 0 
			 2004-05 0 0 0 0 
			 2005-06 0 0 0 0 
			 Total 10,223,825 514,754 252,828 0 
			  NotesDirectindicates where an allocation has been made directly to a BME RSLIndirectindicates that the allocation has been made to another RSL to develop the scheme but once completed the ownership of the property has passed to a BME RSL. Source: Housing Corporation

Local Government Finance

David Kidney: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what  (a) ring-fenced and  (b) other funding he provides to local authorities to enable them to carry out work on bringing empty homes back into use.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	Local housing authorities receive Housing Revenue Account subsidy which is ring- fenced for expenditure on their own housing stock and general funding (which constitutes revenue support grant, redistributed business rates and police grant) which is not ring-fenced.
	We do not hold centrally, information on the proportion of Housing Revenue Grant or general funding spent by individual local authorities on bringing empty homes back into use. It is a matter for local authorities to set their budgets in accordance with local priorities which may include bringing empty homes back into use.

Ministerial Visits (Accommodation)

David Simpson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  what the total cost was of his overnight accommodation on foreign visits in each of the last three years;
	(2)  what the total cost was of overnight accommodation for Ministers of State in his Department on foreign visits in each of the last three years.

Angela Smith: I have been asked to reply.
	Since 1999 the Government have published an annual list of all visits overseas undertaken by Cabinet Ministers costing 500 or more during each financial year and total costs of all ministerial overseas travel, this information includes accommodation costs.
	Copies are available in the Libraries of the House.

Planning

Ian Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many and what proportion of appeals to the planning inspectorate have been upheld for developments in  (a) England and  (b) Surrey in each year since 2000.

Yvette Cooper: The table below shows how many and what proportion of planning appeals have been upheld nationally and in Surrey for the last five calendar years.
	
		
			   Upheld national  Upheld Surrey 
			   Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage 
			 2000 3,188 35 162 35 
			 2001 5,022 36 258 36 
			 2002 5,110 37 245 35 
			 2003 6,013 33 267 31 
			 2004 5,405 33 274 34 
			 2005 7,136 32 336 31

Private Members' Bills

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will list those private Members' Bills in respect of which her Department or its predecessors adopted a policy of neutrality in each session since 2001-02; and if she will make a statement.

Angela Smith: The Department for Communities and Local Government was formed on 5 May 2006.
	Our position in response to private Members' Bills is normally set out by Ministers during the Second Reading debate.

Property Market

Michael Gove: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the reasons for the failure of property transactions in the residential market; and what assessment he has made of the reasons for the failure to complete transactions after an offer was accepted.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	The Department's 1998 research study, Key research on easier home buying and selling, reported that 28 per cent. of transactions fail between offer acceptance and completion. The research study also described the reasons why transactions fail, according to buyers and sellers. For example, the report indicated that 43 per cent. of transaction failures were attributable to an unfavourable survey report. The remained or failed transactions were due to a seller deciding to sell elsewhere, unacceptable delays, chain breakdown and the property being taken off the market. The key findings of the research study indicated that many of the problems associated with the current system are down to information emerging later in the process and that buyers, sellers and the professionals all agreed that sellers should offer more information up front. This research will be updated during the second half of 2006.

Regional Funding

Eric Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the  (a) timetable and  (b) purpose is of regional funding allocations; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	The purpose of regional funding allocations (RFAs) is to enable regions better to align their strategies across the inter-related areas of transport, housing and economic development and to provide them with enhanced input into government policy development and future public spending decisions.
	Advice on priorities within indicative RFAs was invited by the end of January 2006. The Government provided an initial response to the advice in the 2006 Budget. The Government are now considering the advice provided by the regions and will set out in due course how it will be utilised and developed upon in the comprehensive spending review.

Shared Ownership/Key Worker Schemes

Eric Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what figures the Government collects in relation to participation in shared ownership and key worker schemes funded by  (a) central Government and  (b) the Housing Corporation.

Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
	The Government collect data on the number and type of completed sales through shared ownership and key worker schemes funded by the Housing Corporation. Information is also collected on the market value of the property involved, the initial equity stake purchased, the amount of mortgage, the deposit provided and where appropriate, the rent and service charges payable. In addition, data are collected on the previous housing tenure and household characteristics of purchasers, including their gross and net income and savings. The same information has been collected for a small number of sales to key workers who purchased through the previous Starter Home Initiative and which were funded by central government.
	From 1 April 2006, HomeBuy Agents, who are appointed housing associations providing a one-stop-shop and point of contact for affordable housing options in a given area in England, will additionally supply information on expressions of interest from potential applicants and the number of applications received for HomeBuy schemes. The level of detail will vary depending on the individual scheme but figures on the progress of sales for all grant funded Open Market HomeBuy schemes will be provided.

Urban Regeneration

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what funding his Department allocated for urban regeneration in  (a) Romford,  (b) Havering and  (c) Greater London in each of the last 10 years.

Phil Woolas: I have been asked to reply.
	My Department now primarily funds urban regeneration in London through the London Development Agency, which was established in 2000 as a functional body of the Mayor of London. The LDA is free to determine its own expenditure priorities, and the table below shows its yearly expenditure in the borough of Havering and Greater London. No figures are available below borough level.
	
		
			   million 
			   Havering  Greater London 
			 2000-01 6.3 277.1 
			 2001-02 27.5 309.1 
			 2002-03 21.4 289.4 
			 2003-04 7.1 336.0 
			 2004-05 4.5 390.6 
			 2005-06 3.0 415.5 
			 Total 69.8 2,017.7 
		
	
	My Department's Thames Gateway programme has also committed a further 12.1 million funding direct to regeneration projects in the borough of Havering since 2004. This includes 220,000 and 634,000 in 2004-05 and 2005-06 respectively, with a further 11.25 million allocated but not yet spent.
	In addition, the Government office for London has allocated 154 million from the European Regional Development Fund in selected London borough's from the period of 1997 to present. Romford and Havering are not within the eligible area for ERDF funding.